FEDERAL URDU UNIVERSITY

Of Arts, Science and Technology

Gulshan-e-Iqbal Campus
Department Of Physics
M. Phil Program 2006-2007

SYNOPSIS

“Classical And Quantum Hall Effect In Two-Phase

System”

STUDENT NAME: S.M. HASSAN AHMER

SUPERVISOR NAME: PROF.DR.V.E.ARKHINCHEEV

2006
Karachi
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1: History of Hall Effect

1.1 Introduction to Hall Effect 4
1.1.1 Explanation of Hall Effect 5
1.2 Evolution of Resistance Concepts 6
1.2.1 The Hall Effect & the Lorentz force 7
2: Quantum Hall Effect 9
2.1 What is it? 9
2.1.1 Background information 10
The Movement of Electrons in Magnetic Fields 10
2.2 Two-dimensional Electron Systems: 11
2.3 The Quantized Hall Effect: 12
2.3.1 Explanation of the Quantum Hall Effect 13
2.3.2 Dirt and disorder 13
2.4 What the Quantum Hall effect requires: 14
2.5 Disappearance of Quantum Hall Effect: 14
2.6 Why is the Hall Conductance Quantized? 15
3: Classical And Quantum Hall Effect 16
3.1 Classical theories 16
3.1.1 The Drude model 17
3.1.2 Classical electron trajectories 18
3.2 Quantum mechanical treatment 19
3.2.1 Landau model 19
3.2.2 Disorder 21
3.2.3 The high field model 22
3.3 Transitions between quantum Hall states 24
3.4 Low field quantum Hall effect 26
3.5 Gauge arguments 28
3.6 The open conductor approach 29

2
Our Aim: 31

To Study Classical And Quantum Hall Effect In Two Phase System. 31

Objective task: 31

4: Techniques for Observations: 31

4.1 Van der Pauw Technique 31
4.2 Resistivity & Hall Measurements 33
4.3 Sample Geometry 33
4.4 Definitions for Resistivity Measurements 34
4.4.1 Resistivity Measurements 34
4.4.2 Resistivity Calculations 35
4.5 Definitions for Hall Measurements 35
4.5.1 Hall Measurements 36
4.5.2 Hall Calculations 37
5: Benefits
5.1 Applications related to Hall Effect: 38
5.1.1 Advantages over other methods 38
a) Split ring clamp-on sensor 39
b) Analog multiplication 39
c) Power sensing 39
d) Position and motion sensing 40
e) Automotive ignition and fuel injection 40
f) Wheel rotation sensing 40
6: Bibliography 41

3
The Quantum Hall Effect is a quantum-mechanical version of the Hall Effect,
observed in two-dimensional systems of electrons subjected to low temperatures
and strong magnetic fields, these systems do not occur naturally, but, using
advanced technology and production techniques developed within semiconductor
electronics, it has become possible to produce them

The quantization of the Hall conductance has the important property of being
incredibly precise. Actual measurements of the Hall conductance have been found
to be integer or fractional multiples of e²/h to nearly one part in a billion. This
phenomenon, referred to as “Exact Quantization”, has been shown to be a subtle
manifestation of the principle of gauge invariance.”

History of Hall Effect:

1.1 Introduction to Hall Effect:
The Hall Effect was discovered by Edwin Hall in 1879 when he was a graduate
student in the Johns Hopkins University under the advisory of Professor Henry A.
Rowland, after whose name this department is named now. But at that time, even
the electron was not experimentally discovered. Clear understanding had to wait
until quantum mechanics came into appearance.
In 1930, Landau showed that for quantum electrons, unlike classical electrons, the
electron’s orbital motion gave a contribution to the magnetic susceptibility. He also
remarked that the kinetic energy quantization gave rise to a contribution to the
magnetic susceptibility which was periodic in inverse magnetic field. We can see
later that Landau levels along with localization can explain the integer quantum
Hall effect satisfactorily.
The first inversion layer Hall conductivity measurements in strong magnetic fields
were done by S.Kawaji and his colleagues in 1975. Using a somewhat different
experimental arrangement which measured the Hall voltage rather than the Hall

4
current, Klaus von Klitzing and Th. Englert had found flat Hall plateaus in 1978.

However, the precise quantization of the Hall conductance in units of was not
recognized until February of 1980. Five years later, in 1985, Klaus von Klitzing was
awarded Nobel Prize in Physics for the discovery of quantum Hall effect.
This was not the end of the story. In 1982 D.C.Tsui, H.L.Störmer, and A.C.Gossard
discovered the existence of Hall steps with rational fractional quantum numbers,
which is called fractional quantum Hall effect. R.B.Laughlin’s wave functions
established a very good, though not yet perfect understanding of this phenomenon.
Today, the study of quasiparticles of fractional charge and fractional statistics are
still active areas of research

1.1.1 Explanation about Hall Effect:

The Hall Effect comes about due to the nature of the
current flow in the conductor. Current consists of many
small charge-carrying “particles” (typically electrons)
which experience a force (called the Lorentz Force) due to
the magnetic field. Some of these charge elements end up
forced to the sides of the conductors, where they create a pool of net charge. This is
only notable in larger conductors where the separation between the two sides is
large enough.

5
One very important feature of the Hall Effect is that it differentiates between
positive charges moving in one direction and negative charges moving in the
opposite. The Hall Effect offered the first real proof that electric currents in metals
are carried by moving electrons, not by protons. Interestingly enough, the Hall
effect also showed that in some substances (especially semiconductors), it is more
appropriate to think of the current as positive “holes” moving rather than negative
electrons.
By measuring the Hall voltage across the element, one can determine the strength of
the magnetic field applied. This can be expressed as

where VH is the voltage across the width of the plate, I is the current across the plate
length, B is the magnetic flux density, d is the depth of the plate, e is the electron
charge, and n is the bulk density of the carrier electrons.
So-called “Hall Effect sensors” are readily available from a number of different
manufacturers, and may be used in various sensors such as fluid flow sensors,
power sensors, and pressure sensors.
In the presence of large magnetic field strength and low temperature, one can
observe the quantum Hall effect, which is the quantization of the Hall resistance.
In ferromagnetic materials (and paramagnetic materials in a magnetic field), the
Hall resistivity includes an additional contribution, known as the Anomalous Hall
Effect (or the Extraordinary Hall effect), which depends directly on the
magnetization of the material, and is often much larger than the ordinary Hall
effect. (Note that this effect is not due to the contribution of the magnetization to the
total magnetic field.) Although a well-recognized phenomenon, there is still debate
about its origins in the various materials. The anomalous Hall effect can be either an
extrinsic (disorder-related) effect due to spin-dependent scattering of the charge
carriers, or an intrinsic effect which can be described in terms of the Berry phase
effect in the crystal momentum space (k-space).

6
1.2 Evolution of Resistance Concepts:
Electrical characterization of materials evolved in three levels of understanding.
In the early 1800s, the resistance R and conductance G were treated as measurable
physical quantities obtainable from two-terminal I-V measurements (i.e., current I,
voltage V). Later, it became obvious that the resistance alone was not
comprehensive enough since different sample shapes gave different resistance
values. This led to the understanding (second level) that an intrinsic material
property like resistivity (or conductivity) is required that is not influenced by the
particular geometry of the sample. For the first time, this allowed scientists to
quantify the current-carrying capability of the material and carry out meaningful
comparisons between different samples.
By the early 1900s, it was realized that resistivity was not a fundamental material
parameter, since different materials can have the same resistivity. Also, a given
material might exhibit different values of resistivity, depending upon how it was
synthesized. This is especially true for semiconductors, where resistivity alone
could not explain all observations. Theories of electrical conduction were
constructed with varying degrees of success, but until the advent of quantum
mechanics, no generally acceptable solution to the problem of electrical transport
was developed. This led to the definitions of carrier density n and mobility µ (third
level of understanding) which are capable of dealing with even the most complex
electrical measurements today.
1.2.1 The Hall Effect and the Lorentz Force

The basic physical principle underlying the Hall Effect is the Lorentz force. When
an electron moves along a direction
perpendicular to an applied magnetic
field, it experiences a force acting
normal to both directions and moves
in response to this force and the
force effected by the internal electric
field. For an n-type, bar-shaped
semiconductor shown in Fig.1, the

7
carriers is predominately electrons of bulk density n. We assume that a constant
current I flow along the x-axis from left to right in the presence of a z-directed
magnetic field. Electrons subject to the Lorentz force initially drift away from the
current line toward the negative y-axis, resulting in an excess surface electrical
charge on the side of the sample. This charge results in the Hall voltage, a potential
drop across the two sides of the sample. (Note that the force on holes is toward the
same side because of their opposite velocity and positive charge.) This transverse
voltage is the Hall voltage VH and its magnitude is equal to IB/qnd, where I is the
current, B is the magnetic field, d is the sample thickness, and q (1.602 x 10-19 C) is
the elementary charge. In some cases, it is convenient to use layer or sheet density
(ns = nd) instead of bulk density. One then obtains the equation
ns = IB/q|VH|. (1)
Thus, by measuring the Hall voltage VH and from the known values of I, B, and q,
one can determine the sheet density ns of charge carriers in semiconductors. If the
measurement apparatus is set up as described later in Section III, the Hall voltage is
negative for n-type semiconductors and positive for p-type semiconductors. The
sheet resistance RS of the semiconductor can be conveniently determined by use of
the van der Pauw resistivity measurement technique. Since sheet resistance involves
both sheet density and mobility, one can determine the Hall mobility from the
equation
µ = |VH|/RSIB = 1/(qnSRS). (2)
If the conducting layer thickness d is known, one can determine the bulk resistivity
( = RSd) and the bulk density (n = nS/d).

8
Quantum Hall Effect
2.1 What is it?

When an electric current passes through a metal strip there is normally no

difference in potential across the strip if measured perpendicularly to the current. If
however a magnetic field is applied perpendicularly to the plane of the strip, the
electrons are deflected towards one edge and a potential difference is created across
the strip. This phenomenon, termed the
Hall Effect, was discovered more than a
hundred years ago by the American
physicist E.H. Hall. In common metals and
semiconductors, the effect has now been
thoroughly studied and is well understood.
Entirely new phenomena appear when the
Hall Effect is studied in two dimensional
electron systems, in which the electrons are forced to move in an extremely thin
surface layer between for example a metal and a semiconductor. Two-dimensional
systems do not occur naturally, but, using advanced technology and production
techniques developed within semiconductor electronics, it has become possible to
produce them.

For the last ten years there has been reason to suspect that, in two-dimensional
systems, what is called Hall conductivity does not vary evenly, but changes “step-
wise” when the applied magnetic field is changed. The steps should appear at
conductivity values representing an integral number multiplied by a natural constant
of fundamental physical importance. The conductivity is then said to be quantized

9
It was not expected, however, that the quantization rule would apply with a high
accuracy. It therefore came as a great surprise when in the spring of 1980 von
Klitzing showed experimentally that the Hall conductivity exhibits step-like
plateaux which follow this rule with exceptionally high accuracy, deviating from an
integral number by less than 0.000 000 1.Von Klitzing has through his experiment
shown that the quantized Hall effect has fundamental implications for physics. His
discovery has opened up a new research field of great importance and relevance.
Because of the extremely high precision in the quantized Hall effect, it may be used
as a standard of electrical resistance. Secondly, it affords a new possibility of
measuring the earlier-mentioned constant, which is of great importance in, for
example, the fields of atomic and particle physics. These two possibilities in
measurement technique are of the greatest importance, and have been studied in
many laboratories all over the world during the five years since von Klitzing’s
experiment. Of equally great interest is that we are dealing here with a new
phenomenon in quantum physics, and one whose characteristics are still only
partially understood.

Conductivity changes “step-wise” when the magnetic field is changed. The

conductivity is said to be quantized.

2.1.1 Background information

The Movement of Electrons in Magnetic Fields

10
Under the influence of a magnetic field an electron in a vacuum follows a spiral
trajectory with the axis of the spiral in the direction of the magnetic field. In the
plane perpendicular to the field, the electron moves in a circle. In a metal or a
semiconductor, the electron tends to move along a more complicated closed
trajectory, but with fairly strong magnetic fields and at normal temperatures this
ordered movement is fragmented by collisions. At extremely low temperatures (a
few degrees above absolute zero) and with extremely strong magnetic fields, the
effect of collisions is suppressed and the electrons are again forced into ordered
movement. Under these extreme conditions the classical theory does not apply: the
movement becomes quantized, which means that the energy can only assume
certain definite values, termed Landau levels after the Russian physicist L. Landau
(Nobel prizewinner in 1962) who developed the theory of the effect as early as
1930.
2.2 Two-dimensional Electron Systems:
Two-dimensional material systems do not occur naturally. Under special
circumstances, however, certain systems can behave as if they were two-
dimensional - but only within very limited energy intervals and temperature ranges.
The first to demonstrate this possibility theoretically was J.R. Schrieffer (Nobel
prize winner in 1972). In work appearing in 1957 he showed that in a surface layer
between metal and semiconductor electrons can be made to move along the surface
but not perpendicular to it. Eleven years later a research team at IBM showed that
this idea could be realized experimentally. The study of two-dimensional systems
developed rapidly during the years that have followed.
These experiments used samples
employing a specially designed
transistor, a so called MOSFET
(Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor
Field Effect Transistor). Other
types of artificial samples –
hetero structures have

11
subsequently been used, in which the samples have been developed using molecular
beams.
It should also be mentioned that advances in technology and production methods
within semiconductor electronics have played a crucial role in the study of two-
dimensional electron systems, and were a precondition for the discovery of the
quantized Hall Effect.
2.3 The Quantized Hall Effect:

An important step in the direction of the experimental discovery was taken in a

theoretical study by the Japanese physicist T. Ando. Together with his co-workers
he calculated that conductivity could at special points assume values that are integer
multiples of e2 /h, where e is the electron charge and h is Planck’s constant. It could
scarcely be expected, however, that the theory would apply with great accuracy.

During the years 1975 to 1981 many Japanese researchers published experimental
papers dealing with Hall conductivity. They obtained results corresponding to
Ando’s at special points, but they made no attempt to determine the accuracy. Nor
was their method especially suitable for achieving great accuracy. A considerably
better method was developed in 1978 by Th. Englert and K. von Klitzing. Their
experimental curve exhibits well defined plateaux, but the authors did not comment
upon these results. The quantized Hall Effect could in fact have been discovered
then, the crucial experiment was carried out by Klaus von Klitzing in the spring of
1980 at the Hochfelt-Magnet-Labor in Grenoble, and published as a joint paper
with G. Dorda and M. Pepper. Dorda and Pepper had developed methods of
producing the samples used in the experiment. These samples had extremely high
electron mobility, which was a prerequisite for the discovery. The experiment
clearly demonstrated the existence of plateaux with values that are quantized with
extraordinarily great precision. One also calculated a value for the constant e2 /h
which corresponds well with the value accepted earlier. This is the work that
represents the discovery of the quantized Hall Effect. Following the original
discovery, a large number of studies have been carried out that have elucidated
different aspects of the quantized Hall Effect. The national metrological

12
(measurement) laboratories in Germany, the USA, Canada, Australia, France, Japan
and other countries have carried out very detailed investigations of the precision of
the quantization, in order to be able to use the effect as a standard.

2.3.1 Explanation of the Quantum Hall Effect

The zeros and plateau in the two components of the resistivity tensor are intimately
connected and both can be understood in terms of the Landau levels (LLs) formed
in a magnetic field.
In the absence of magnetic field the density of states in 2D is constant as a function
of energy, but in field the available states clump into Landau levels separated by the
cyclotron energy, with regions of energy between the LLs where there are no
allowed states. As the magnetic field is swept the LLs move relative to the Fermi
energy.
When the Fermi energy lies in a gap between LLs electrons can not move to new
states and so there is no scattering. Thus the transport is dissipationless and the
resistance falls to zero.
The classical Hall resistance was just given by B/Ne. However, the number of
current carrying states in each LL is eB/h, so when there are i LLs at energies below
the Fermi energy completely filled with ieB/h electrons, the Hall resistance is h/ie2.
At integer filling factor this is exactly the same as the classical case.
The difference in the QHE is that the Hall resistance can not change from the
quantized value for the whole time the Fermi energy is in a gap, i.e between the
fields (a) and (b) in the diagram, and so a plateau results. Only when case (c) is
reached, with the Fermi energy in the Landau level, can the Hall voltage change and
a finite value of resistance appear.
This picture has assumed a fixed Fermi energy, i.e fixed carrier density, and a
changing magnetic field. The QHE can also be observed by fixing the magnetic
field and varying the carrier density, for instance by sweeping a surface gate.

13
2.3.2 Dirt and disorder
Although it might be thought that a perfect crystal would give the strongest effect,
the QHE actually relies on the presence of dirt in the samples. The effect of dirt and
disorder can best be though of as creating a background potential landscape, with
hills and valleys, in which the electrons move. At low temperature each electron
trajectory can be drawn as a contour in the landscape. Most of these contours
encircle hills or valleys so do not transfer an electron from one side of the sample to
another, they are localized states. A few states (just one at T=0) in the middle of
each LL will be extended across the sample and carry the current. At higher
temperatures the electrons have more energy so more states become delocalized and
the width of extended states increases.
The gap in the density of states that gives rise to QHE plateaux is the gap between
extended states. Thus at lower temperatures and in dirtier samples the plateaus are
wider. In the highest mobility semiconductor hetero junctions the plateaux are much
narrower.
2.4 What the Quantum Hall effect requires:
1. Two-dimensional electron gas
2. Very low temperature (< 4 K)
3. Very strong magnetic field (~ 10 Tesla)

2.5 Disappearance of Quantum Hall Effect:

The disappearance of integer quantum Hall effect (IQHE) at strong disorder and
weak magnetic field is studied in the tight-binding lattice model.\footnote D. N.
Sheng and Z. Y. Weng, Phys. Rev. Lett., to be published. We found a generic

14
sequence by which the IQHE plateaus disappear: higher IQHE plateaus always
vanish earlier than lower ones, and extended levels between those plateaus do not
float up in energy but keep merging together after the destruction of plateaus. All of
these features remain to be true in the weak-field limit as shown by the
thermodynamic-localization-length calculation. Topological characterization in
terms of Chern integers provides a simple physical explanation and suggests a
qualitative difference between the lattice and continuum models. A comparison of
our numerical results with recent experimental measurements will be made.

2.6 Why is the Hall Conductance Quantized?

The Integer Quantum Hall effect, first observed by K. von Klitzing, is used to
determine the fine structure constant with precision that is comparable to the
precision one gets from atomic physics. It is also used as a practical and
fundamental way to define the Ohm.
It is instructive to look at the experimental data. The graph that looks like a
staircase function has remarkably flat plateaus. The ordinates of the plateaus
correspond to integer multiple of the quantum unit of conductance, and can be
measured very precisely.
An intriguing aspect of this phenomenon is that a precision measurement of
fundamental constants is carried on a system that is only poorly characterized: Little
is actually known about the microscopic details of the system, which is artificially
fabricated, and whose precise composition and shape are not known with a
precision that is anywhere comparable with the precision that comes out of the
experiment. There are two related but somewhat distinct theoretical frameworks
that attempt to answer this question. The problem we pose has to do with their
mutual relation, and the extent to which they give a satisfactory answer.
One framework identifies the Hall conductance with a topological invariant: The
first Chern number of a certain bundle associated with the ground state of the
quantum Hamiltonian. This framework applies to a rather general class of quantum
Schrödinger Hamiltonians, including multi particle ones. It has two principal
drawbacks. The first is that it requires an interesting topological structure: It applies
in cases where there is a Brillouin zone, and in cases where configuration space is

15
multiply connected. The multiple connectivity can be motivated, to some extent, by
the experimental setup if one includes the leads that connect to the two dimensional
electron gas in the system. This makes the Hall conductance a property of the
system and not just of the two dimensional electron gas. The second drawback is
that the Chern number is identified with a certain average of the Hall conductance.
In some cases this average comes for free, but in general it does not.
A second theoretical framework identifies the Hall conductance with a Fred Holm
index of a certain operator. This framework is known to apply to non interacting
electrons in two dimensions where the Fred Holm operator is constructed from the
one particle Schrödinger Hamiltonian of the system. This framework applies to a
particularly popular model of the Integer quantum Hall effect: non interacting
electrons in two dimensions and with random potential. Some models, like non
interacting electrons in homogenous magnetic field in two dimensions, and its
generalization to a periodic potential can be analyzed either framework, and the
results agree. In these cases the Hall conductance can be interpreted either as a
Chern number or as an Index. the two frameworks are complementary: Chern
allows for electron interaction while Fred Holm does not, Chern assumes an
interesting topology while Fred Holm does not and requires that configuration
space be two dimensional; Chern comes with an averaging while Fred Holm does
not. The Chern framework would be a satisfactory theory if one could take the
thermodynamic limit and remove the averaging. Progress in this direction has been
made by Thou less and Niu who described (implicit) conditions under which this is
the case. The Fred Holm framework would be a satisfactory theory of the integer
quantum Hall effect if one could remove the restriction of non interacting electrons.

3:Classical And Quantum Hall Effect

3.1 Classical theories

16
 As there are some limiting cases where a classical description of a
disordered two-dimensional electron system is very instructive for the
understanding of the quantum Hall effect, we will give the results of a classical
description of an electron in a magnetic field.

3.1.1 The Drude model

The basic theoretical model for electrical transport is the Drude model,
which, although a very simplified model, still gives a reasonably good description
of transport at high temperature and usually is a good starting point for more
sophisticated models. Electrons are treated as classical particles moving under the
influence of external fields and a friction term represented by an average scattering
time

Here m is the electron mass, v the velocity vector, B and E are the magnetic and
electric field vectors, respectively. Choosing B along the z-direction (B = (0; 0;B)),

setting ≡ 0 (steady state condition) and using the equation for the
current density, we get the following expression for the conductivity tensor with the

mobility _

17
µ = eτ/m and the cyclotron frequency we = eB/m. As experiments usually measure
resistances, it is convenient to convert these results to the corresponding resistivity
tensor ρ

_
The Drude model gives a magnetic field independent diagonal resistivity ρxx and a
Hall (transverse) resistivity ρ xy which is linear in B.

Figure 3.1 Resistivity and conductivity in Drude Model

3.1.2 Classical electron trajectories

To find the actual electron trajectories one has to solve the equation of motion for a
classical charged particle under the influence of a magnetic and electric field, as it is
done before using Hamiltonian mechanism. The results for a homogenous magnetic
field along z (B = (0; 0;B)) and a homogenous electric field along x (E = (E; 0; 0))
are:

vD = -E/B is called the drift velocity. The coordinates have been separated into a
slowly varying part (X(t); Y (t)), and a rapidly varying part (ε(t); η(t)), where the
slow motion is a constant drift with velocity vD along y, and the rapid motion is a

18
cyclotron motion around the center coordinates with the frequency we.
The electron performs a cycloid motion, drifting perpendicular both to the magnetic
and electric field, along an equipotential line.

Figure 3.2: Electron trajectory in a classical picture

3.2 Quantum mechanical treatment

The origins of the quantum Hall effect can only be found by a quantum mechanical
calculation. For this, a starting point is the Hamiltonian for an electron in a
homogenous magnetic field

Choosing the direction of B along the z-axis, one can use the Landau gauge for the
vector potential: A = (0;Bx;0). This gauge is appropriate for systems with
translational symmetry along y. Another possible gauge is the symmetric gauge A =
½ B× r, which is a good choice for systems with axial symmetry Assuming further
that V (r) = V (x; y)+Vz (z), the Schrodinger equation will separate into a part
depending on z, and the remaining, now effectively two dimensional part depending
on x and y. Note that Vz(z) can be zero (as assumed by Landau for the 3D case), or
can be given by a confinement potential imposed e. g. by a semiconductor
heterostructure, therefore creating a "real" 2D system. In any of the two cases the
results for the remaining 2D problem in the (x,y)-plane are the same.

3.2.1 Landau model

19
In the case originally considered by Landau, the external potential is assumed to
vanish (V (r) = 0, no electric field). The Hamiltonian then doesn't depend on y, we
get a plane wave solution in the y-direction, and in the x-direction the problem
becomes equivalent to a harmonic oscillator:

with the center coordinate , and the solution

W is the extension of the system in y-direction, m is an integer, and Hn are the

Hermite polynomials. The states (x; y) are delocalized (plane waves) in y-
direction, and localized (harmonic oscillator states) around X in x-direction. Note
however that the shape of the wave functions depend strongly on the gauge used for
A. The energy eigen values are called Landau levels

As the energy of an electron is independent of its x-position, the eigen values are
infinitely degenerate, and the density of states (DOS)

is ill-defined (L is the extension of the system in x-direction). To get around this

problem, one considers only states with
_

20
and takes the limit L afterwards. This method, also called the Landau
counting of states, gives a DOS consisting of equidistant δ-peaks separated by

and a degeneracy of 2πl2 B per Landau level:

The actual wave function is delocalized across the sample along y, and localized in

an area of width around X in x-direction. Note that using the symmetric

gauge for A, one gets the same energy Eigenvalues, but the wave functions are
localized on a circle with radius p2m lB (m is a non-negative integer)

3.2.2 Disorder
In real semiconductor samples some kind of disorder potential, caused for example
by lattice defects or ionized donors is always present. The exact calculation of the
effect of a random potential onto the energy spectrum of the problem is not possible
in a straightforward way, on one hand because it is by far not clear what shape the
disorder potential should have (one can think of the whole range from an
unscreened 1/r Coulomb potential to a completely screened δ-potential), and on the
other hand the mathematical effort even for the simplest situation of a random
arrangement of δ-potentials is considerable. It is clear however, that the degeneracy
of the Landau levels will be lifted by an additional potential, and the delta-peaks in
the density of states transform into structures with a finite width. A prominent
approach to calculate the shape of the disorder-broadened Landau levels is the self
consistent Born approximation (SCBA), where only single scattering events are
taken into account. The SCBA gives an elliptic function as shape for the broadened
Landau levels, models including multiple scattering events give a Gaussian shape

where Γn is a Landau level dependent width. In addition to the broadening of the

Landau levels, a disorder potential will change the nature of most of the electronic

21
states in the Landau level. Except the states in the middle of the level, which will be
extended over the sample, all electronic states will localize. This can be shown
easily with the help of the semi-phenomenological high field model

3.2.3 The high field model

Using the separation of the coordinates introduced in chapter 3.1.2, the Hamiltonian
for an electron in a magnetic field and a disorder
V (x; y) looks as follows:

The x- and y- coordinates do not commute

Taking the limit B , one can neglect ζ and η in the argument of V , as their

expectation values are of the order of The Hamiltonian then separates,

and the first part is equivalent to the Landau level energies

As the commtator of [X; Y ] is proportional to 1=B, X and Y can be treated as

classical variables for , and the problem can be calculated classically,
resulting in the following equations of motion

22
This implies that dV/dt vanishes, so the potential energy of the electron is

Figure 3.3: Disorder potential with closed orbits (localized states) and open orbits (extended states)

constant.

We can say that, in the limit of high B, the electron is delocalized on an area of

approximately and moves on the equipotential lines of the disorder potential. If

V is symmetric around V = 0, then electron orbits for E≠ħωe/2 (lowest Landau
level), will circle around valleys or peaks of the disorder potential and will therefore
be localized as shown in figure , and only for E=ħωe/2 the trajectory will traverse
the sample and give a delocalized state. The electronic density of states for the
Landau model with and without disorder is sketched in figure Depending on the
value of EF with respect to ħωe there will be either localized states in the vicinity of

23
the Fermi energy and the system will be

Figure 3.4: Schematic density of states for the disordered Landau model.
The grey regions represent localized states.

insulating, or extended states, resulting in the sample to show a metallic-like

behavior. Changing the ratio of EF to ħωe, either by changing the carrier density or
by sweeping the magnetic field will cause a series of transitions between metallic
and insulating states. Note that because V will rise strongly at the boundaries of a
sample in x and y-direction (as only in this case the wave function will vanish
outside the sample), there will always be an extended state for all ratios of EF to
ħωe propagating at the edge of the sample. This edge state can carry a current, even
if all other states around EF are localized.

3.3 Transitions between Quantum Hall States

At low temperatures the DOS of a 2DEG will decay into areas of extended states
(in the vicinity of the Landau level centers) and areas of localized states that
surround the former (in the Landau level tails). We can identify two external

24
transport regimes: the plateau region, when the Fermi energy is situated in a range
of localized states, and the transition region between two plateaus, when the Fermi
energy lies in an area of extended states.

Figure 3.5: electron trajectories for the plateau region

Electron trajectories for the plateau regime are shown in figure 3.5. There is no net
current flowing in the bulk of the sample, and transport takes place only in the edge
states of the sample. As there are no extended states in the vicinity of EF , the
longitudinal conductivity σxx vanishes. The Hall conductivity is determined by the
number n of occupied Landau levels below EF , and can be shown to be equal to n
e2./ħ In the transition regime, when EF lies in a region of extended states, electron
transport in the bulk of the sample is possible, and therefore dissipative currents
will flow in the sample giving a nonzero longitudinal conductivity and a Hall
conductivity that lies between two quantized values. Typical electron trajectories for
the transition region are shown in figure 3.6. An interesting question is, how the
crossover between these two regimes will look like. According to the high field
model (chapter 3.2.2), electron trajectories in the plateau region are closed, with the
diameter of the closed loops increasing as the Fermi energy approaches an area of
extended states. For a real world (finite size) sample, the system should enter the
transition regime as soon as the average diameter of the electron trajectories

25
exceeds the sample size L. Note that for finite temperatures, L has

Figure 3.6: electron trajectories for the transition region between two
to be plateaus replaced by an effective sample size, which corresponds to the phase
coherence length of the charge carriers. This length, which is usually given by LФ
or Lin, depends on temperature with a power law 2 )
Theoretically the transition between two quantum Hall states is being described Ф
as a continuous quantum phase transition, order parameter being the localization
length ξ which corresponds to the mean diameter of a closed electron trajectory. At
the transition point, when different localized trajectories come close to each other,
electrons are able to tunnel between different localized states close to a saddle
point. In this picture, the transition between the two regimes is a quantum-
percolation transition. The order parameter ξ has been predicted to diverge with a

power law at the critical energy of the transition: The most prominent
model for the calculation of the critical exponent _ is the Chalker- Codington
model, which calculates the percolation exponent for a regular lattice of saddle
points. The result for an analytic solution is ν = 7/3, a value which has been verified
numerically by lattice models for different disorder potentials. The critical
conductivity σxx(Ec) was found to be e2/2h. In a typical quantum Hall experiment
one therefore sees a series of phase transitions between different plateau states, with
a values of σxx = 0 in the two neighboring plateau regions, reaching a value of σxx
= 1/2 at the transition field Bc. Bc corresponds to the critical energy Ec = ħωe. As an
electronic state has to be considered extended as soon as its localization length is
larger than the effective sample size (ξ> Lin), the width of the area of extended
states around the critical energy Ec will shrink with decreasing temperature. As Lin
increases with a power law for decreasing temperature, the area of extended states
should shrink to zero width for T 0. The transition region between two Quantum

26
Hall States should therefore become more and more narrow for decreasing
temperature. As it was shown by Pruisken the transport coefficients in the transition
region should be determined by a regular function that only depends on a singe
scaling variable:

This makes it possible to observe the product of the localization length exponent ν
and the exponent of the inelastic scattering length p for example in the half width

of the peak in ρxx, or the slope of ρxy at Bc:

_
Theoretical calculations predict a value of μ = 0:43.

Figure 3.7: Sharpening of the transition between two quantum Hall plateaus for decreasing
temperature.

The critical field Bc usually corresponds to a magnetic field value where the .Fermi
energy EF coincides with the center of a Landau level. However, there exists an
exception to this rule.

3.4 Low field quantum Hall effect

In the limit T 0 the single parameter localization theory predicts all two
dimensional systems to be localized at B = 0, there can be no extended states at zero
field. For the quantum Hall effect in high magnetic fields however, extended states

27
are essential, and their existence is well established. The question is what will
happen to the extended states that are connected with the Landau level centers, as
the magnetic field is decreased. Theoretically the possibility that these states just
disappear is difficult to establish. It was R. Laughlin and D. Khmelnitzkii who
suggested that these extended states will oat up in energy as the magnetic fields
approaches zero. The values of the magnetic field, where the extended state
associated with the n-th Landau level will cross the Fermi energy when floating up
was taken to be the value where the Drude Hall conductivity corresponds to the
quantum value (n + 1/2)e2/h. This floating up scenario therefore predicts quantum
Hall phases to exist even at low magnetic field As will be shown in
chapter 3.2.2, a necessary condition for the observability of a Hall plateau is a value
of σxx 1. As the only available microscopic mechanism, that could lead to a
decrease of σxx in low magnetic fields is weak localization, which gives much
smaller corrections than strong localization that occurs in high fields, the condition
σxx 1 is usually not fulfilled at experimentally accessible temperatures, and the
quantum Hall effect at low magnetic fields cannot be observed The only
experimental observations

28
Figure 3.8: Left: Magneto conductance for a quantum Hall system according to the floating up
scenario, in the limit of very high temperature ( Drude ) and zero temperature. Right: Extended
states in the floating up scenario. Dashed lines represent the conventional Landau levels.

Any time an extended state crosses the Fermi level, there will be a quantum Hall
transition visible in the transport data of a quantum Hall transition at low magnetic
fields were made in strongly disordered systems, that only show a single quantum
Hall phase, and where a clear transition from the low field insulating state to the
corresponding quantum Hall plateau at σxy = 1 exists. Transitions between higher
Quantum Hall States have only been observed in the high field regime (ωt < 1) up
to now.
The transport coefficients for a system in the limit T 0, according to the floating
up scenario, are shown in figure 3.8.

3.5 Gauge arguments

In one of the first theoretical papers dealing with the quantum Hall effect, R.
Laughlin proposed an explanation for the exact quantization of the Hall
conductance that was based on gauge considerations. An extension of his paper was
published by B. Halperlin later. Both authors consider a two-dimensional system in
a continuous but multiply connected geometry like a cylinder or ring geometry, e.g.
as shown in figure .9. The 2D electron gas is assumed to be subject to a magnetic

29
field B perpendicular to its surface, and it

Figure.3.9: Geometry considered by R. B. Laughlin in his gauge argument for the exact quantization
of the Hall conductance.
is assumed that there is an additional magnetic flux Φo that can be varied freely
without changing the value of B, passing through the hole of the system. The
system then should be gauge invariant under a flux change ΔФo by an integral
multiple of the flux quantum h/e. An adiabatic change of Φ0 by a single flux
quantum should therefore leave the system unchanged. Assuming a DOS as shown
in the previous chapter, the effect of the flux change ΔΦo onto the electronic wave
functions will depend on the nature of the states at the Fermi energy. Localized
states will just acquire an additional phase factor, they won't be affected otherwise
Extended states however will suffer an electromotive force, and will be pushed to
the exterior of the sample. After Laughlin, gauge invariance requires an integer
number of electrons to be transferred across the sample under a flux change ΔΦo =
h/e, which in turn requires the Hall conductivity to be quantized. It should be noted
that some authors claim the gauge argument presented to be incomplete. After
Laughlin's gauge argument has been superceded of what is nowadays called the
topological approach to the quantum Hall effect. In this theoretical approach the
Hall conductivity is identified with the Chern number, which is a topological
invariant

30
3.6 The open conductor approach
A theory treating the QHE from a totally different point of view has been worked
out by M. Buttiker Based on a theory of Landauer viewing conductances in terms of
transmission of electrons; this theory inherently includes the presence of contacts, a
fact which had been neglected in the previously mentioned theories. Associating
each contact or probe of the system with an electrochemical potential Vi, the
resistance of a four probe conductor is given by the two current contacts are
labeled by k and l

the voltage probes m and n. the conductance coefficients are defined by

The main point of Buttiker's theory is the relation of the conductance coefficients
gmn to the transmission probabilities of an electron incident at contact m with the

transmission probabilities of an electron incident at point n in quantum state β

leaving the conductor at probe m in state α. The main problem in this approach is
the calculation of the coefficients Tmn, which is

Figure 3.10: Classical representation for perfectly transmitting edge channels

and localized, non-current carrying states in the Buttiker picture.

31
simplified a little bit in the case of the quantum Hall effect. In the case of the
plateau regime (EF located in a region of localized states) the only current carrying
states are the previously mentioned edge states. As these edge states are moreover
sufficiently isolated from all other current carrying states (e. g. on the opposite side
of the sample), they are perfectly transmitting (Tmn =1), as there are no states an
electron could scatter to. As a consequence of this absence of backscattering the
longitudinal conductance of the sample vanishes (gxx = 0), and the Hall conductance
corresponds to e2/h times the number of occupied edge states or channels (gxy =
n.e2/h). An illustration of the classically calculated electron orbits in the quantum
Hall plateau regime is shown in figure 3.10.

32
4.Our Aim: To Study Classical And Quantum Hall
Effect In Two Phase System.
To solve this problem we want to consider some objective task as;

Objective task:
1) To reduce a duality relation in magnetic field using rotational
transformation method.

2) To analyze behavior of hall constant at strong magnetic fields

3) To study local distribution of currents and fields in the hall system with
the metal disk.

5. Techniques for Observations

5.1 The van der Pauw Technique

In order to determine both the mobility µ and the sheet density ns, a combination
of a resistivity measurement and a Hall measurement is needed. We discuss here the
van der Pauw technique which, due to its convenience, is widely used in the
semiconductor industry to determine the resistivity of uniform samples (References
3 and 4). As originally devised by van der Pauw, one uses an arbitrarily shaped (but
simply connected, i.e., no holes or non conducting islands or inclusions), thin-plate
sample containing four very small ohmic contacts placed on the periphery
(preferably in the corners) of the plate. A schematic of a rectangular van der Pauw
configuration is shown in Fig. 2.
The objective of the resistivity measurement is to determine the sheet resistance RS.
Van der Pauw demonstrated that there are actually two characteristic resistances RA
and RB, associated with the corresponding terminals shown in Fig. 2. RA and RB are
related to the sheet resistance RS through the van der Pauw equation

33
 exp(-πRA/RS) + exp(-πRB/RS) = 1 (3)
which can be solved numerically for RS.
The bulk electrical resistivity can be calculated using
= RSd. (4)
To obtain the two characteristic resistances, one applies a dc current I into contact 1
and out of contact 2 and measures the voltage V43 from contact 4 to contact 3 as
shown in Fig. 2. Next, one applies the current I into contact 2 and out of contact 3
while measuring the voltage V14 from contact 1 to contact 4. RA and RB are
calculated by means of the following expressions:
RA = V43/I12 and RB = V14/I23. (5)

The objective of the Hall measurement in the van der Pauw technique is to
determine the sheet carrier density ns by measuring the Hall voltage VH. The Hall
voltage measurement consists of a series of voltage measurements with a constant
current I and a constant magnetic field B applied perpendicular to the plane of the
sample. Conveniently, the same sample, shown again in Fig. 3, can also be used for
the Hall measurement. To measure the Hall voltage VH, a current I is forced through
the opposing pair of contacts 1 and 3 and the Hall voltage VH (= V24) is measured
across the remaining pair of contacts 2 and 4. Once the Hall voltage VH is acquired,
the sheet carrier density ns can be calculated via ns = IB/q|VH| from the known
values of I, B, and q.
There are practical aspects which must be considered when carrying out Hall and
resistivity measurements. Primary concerns are ohmic contact quality and size,
sample uniformity and accurate thickness determination, thermo magnetic effects
due to non uniform temperature, and photoconductive and photovoltaic effects

34
which can be minimized by measuring in a dark environment. Also, the sample
lateral dimensions must be large compared to the size of the contacts and the
sample thickness. Finally, one must accurately measure sample temperature,
magnetic field intensity, electrical current, and voltage

5.2 Resistivity and Hall Measurements

The following procedures for carrying out Hall measurements provide a guideline
for the beginning user who wants to learn operational procedures, as well as a
reference for experienced operators who wish to invent and engineer improvements
in the equipment and methodology.

5.3 Sample Geometry

It is preferable to fabricate samples from thin plates of the semiconductor material
and to adopt a suitable geometry, as illustrated in Fig. 4. The average diameters (D)
of the contacts, and sample thickness (d) must be much smaller than the distance
between the contacts (L). Relative errors caused by non-zero values of D are of the
order of D/L.
The following equipment is required:
Permanent magnet or an electromagnet (500 to 5000 gauss)
Constant-current source with currents ranging from 10 µA to 100 mA (for semi-
insulating GaAs, ρ ~ 107 Ω·cm, a range as low as 1 nA is needed)
High input impedance voltmeter covering 1 µV to 1 V
Sample temperature-measuring probe (resolution of 0.1 °C for high accuracy work)

35
5.4 Definitions for Resistivity Measurements
Four leads are connected to the four ohmic contacts on the sample. These are
labeled 1, 2, 3, and 4 counterclockwise as shown in Fig. 4a. It is important to use
the same batch of wire for all four leads in order to minimize thermoelectric effects.
Similarly, all four ohmic contacts should consist of the same material.
We define the following parameters (see Fig. 2):
ρ = sample resistivity (in Ω·cm)
d = conducting layer thickness (in cm)
I12 = positive dc current I injected into contact 1 and taken out of contact 2.
Likewise for I23, I34, I41, I21, I14, I43, I32 (in amperes, A)
V12 = dc voltage measured between contacts 1 and 2 (V1 - V2) without applied
magnetic field (B = 0). Likewise for V23, V34, V41, V21, V14, V43, V32 (in volts, V)

5.4.1 Resistivity Measurements

The data must be checked for internal consistency, for ohmic contact quality, and
for sample uniformity.
Set up a dc current I such that when applied to the sample the power dissipation
does not exceed 5 mW (preferably 1 mW). This limit can be specified before the
automatic measurement sequence is started by measuring the resistance R between
any two opposing leads (1 to 3 or 2 to 4) and setting
I < (200R)-0.5. (6)
Apply the current I21 and measure voltage V34
Reverse the polarity of the current (I12) and measure V43
Repeat for the remaining six values (V41, V14, V12, V21, V23, V32)
Eight measurements of voltage yield the following eight values of resistance, all of
which must be positive:
R21,34 = V34/I21, R12,43 = V43/I12,
R32,41 = V41/I32, R23,14 = V14/I23, (7)
R43,12 = V12/I43, R34,21 = V21/I34,
R14,23 = V23/I14, R41,32 = V32/I41.
Note that with this switching arrangement the voltmeter is reading only positive
voltages, so the meter must be carefully zeroed.

36
Because the second half of this sequence of measurements is redundant, it permits
important consistency checks on measurement repeatability, ohmic contact quality,
and sample uniformity.
Measurement consistency following current reversal requires that:
R21,34 = R12,43 R43,12 = R34,21
R32,41 = R23,14 R14,23 = R41,32 (8)
The reciprocity theorem requires that:
R21,34 + R12,43 = R43,12 + R34,21, and
R32,41 + R23,14 = R14,23 + R41,32. (9)
If any of the above fail to be true within 5 % (preferably 3 %), investigate the
sources of error.

5.4.2 Resistivity Calculations

The sheet resistance RS can be determined from the two characteristic resistances
RA = (R21,34 + R12,43 + R43,12 + R34,21)/4 and
RB = (R32,41 + R23,14 + R14,23 + R41,32)/4 (10)
via the van der Pauw equation [Eq. (3)]. For numerical solution of Eq. (3), see the
routine in Section IV. If the conducting layer thickness d is known, the bulk
resistivity ρ = RS d can be calculated from RS.

5.5 Definitions for Hall Measurements

The Hall measurement, carried out in the presence of a magnetic field, yields the
sheet carrier density ns and the bulk carrier density n or p (for n-type or p-type
material) if the conducting layer thickness of the sample is known. The Hall voltage
for thick, heavily doped samples can be quite small (of the order of micro volts).

The difficulty in obtaining accurate results is not merely the small magnitude of the
Hall voltage since good quality digital voltmeters on the market today are quite
adequate. The more severe problem comes from the large offset voltage caused by
non symmetric contact placement, sample shape, and sometimes non uniform
temperature.

The most common way to control this problem is to acquire two sets of Hall
measurements, one for positive and one for negative magnetic field direction. The
relevant definitions are as follows (Fig. 3):

37
I13 = dc current injected into lead 1 and taken out of lead 3. Likewise for I31, I42, I24.

B = constant and uniform magnetic field intensity (to within 3 %) applied parallel to
the z-axis within a few degrees (Fig .3). B is positive when pointing in the positive z
direction, and negative when pointing in the negative z direction.
V24P = Hall voltage measured between leads 2 and 4 with magnetic field positive for
I13. Likewise for V42P, V13P, and V31P.
Similar definitions for V24N, V42N, V13N, V31N apply when the magnetic field B is
reversed.

5.5.1 Hall Measurements

The procedure for the Hall measurement is:
Apply a positive magnetic field B
Apply a current I13 to leads 1 and 3 and measure V24P
Apply a current I31 to leads 3 and 1 and measure V42P
Likewise, measure V13P and V31P with I42 and I24, respectively
Reverse the magnetic field (negative B)
Likewise, measure V24N, V42N, V13N, and V31N with I13, I31, I42, and I24, respectively
The above eight measurements of Hall voltages V24P, V42P, V13P, V31P, V24N, V42N, V13N,
and V31N determine the sample type (n or p) and the sheet carrier density ns. The
Hall mobility can be determined from the sheet density ns and the sheet resistance
RS obtained in the resistivity measurement. See Eq. (2).
This sequence of measurements is redundant in that for a uniform sample the
average Hall voltage from each of the two diagonal sets of contacts should be the
same.

5.5.2 Hall Calculations

Steps for the calculation of carrier density and Hall mobility are:
Calculate the following (be careful to maintain the signs of measured voltages to
correct for the offset voltage):
VC = V24P - V24N, VD = V42P - V42N,
VE = V13P - V13N, and VF = V31P - V31N. (11)
The sample type is determined from the polarity of the voltage sum VC + VD + VE +
VF. If this sum is positive (negative), the sample is p-type (n-type).

38
The sheet carrier density (in units of cm-2) is calculated from
ps = 8 x 10-8 IB/[q(VC + VD + VE + VF)]
if the voltage sum is positive, or
(12)
-8
ns = |8 x 10 IB/[q(VC + VD + VE + VF)]|
if the voltage sum is negative,
where B is the magnetic field in gauss (G) and I is the dc current in amperes (A).
The bulk carrier density (in units of cm-3) can be determined as follows if the
conducting layer thickness d of the sample is known:
n = ns/d
p = ps/d (13)
The Hall mobility µ = 1/qnsRS (in units of cm2V-1s-1) is calculated from the sheet
carrier density ns (or ps) and the sheet resistance RS. See Eq. (2).
The procedure for this sample is now complete.
Sample identification, such as ingot number, wafer number, sample geometry,
sample temperature, thickness, data, and operator
Values of sample current I and magnetic field B
Calculated value of sheet resistance RS, and resistivity ρ if thickness d is known
Calculated value of sheet carrier density ns or ps, and the bulk-carrier density n or p
if d is known
Calculated value of Hall mobility µ

6. Benefits
5.1 Applications related to Hall Effect:
Hall Effect devices produce a very low signal level and thus require amplification.
While suitable for laboratory instruments, the vacuum tube amplifiers available in
the first half of the 20th century were too expensive, power consuming, and
unreliable for everyday applications. It was only with the development of the low
cost integrated circuit that the Hall Effect sensor became suitable for mass
application. Many devices now sold as “Hall effect sensors” are in fact a device
containing both the sensor described above and a high gain integrated circuit (IC)

39
amplifier in a single package. Reed switch electrical motors using the Hall Effect IC
is another application.

5.1.1 Advantages over other methods

Hall Effect devices when appropriately packaged are immune to dust, dirt, mud, and
water. These characteristics make Hall Effect devices better for position sensing
than alternative means such as optical and electromechanical sensing.

HALL EFFECT CURRENT SENSOR WITH INTERNAL INTEGRATED CIRCUIT AMPLIFIER. 8MM OPENING. ZERO CURRENT
OUTPUT VOLTAGE IS MIDWAY BETWEEN THE SUPPLY VOLTAGES THAT MAINTAIN A 4 TO 8 VOLT DIFFERENTIALS. NON-
ZERO CURRENT RESPONSE IS PROPORTIONAL TO THE VOLTAGE SUPPLIED AND IS LINEAR TO 60 AMPERES FOR THIS
PARTICULAR (25 A) DEVICE.

When electrons flow through a conductor, a magnetic field is produced. Thus, it is

possible to create a non-contacting current sensor. The device has three terminals. A
sensor voltage is applied across two terminals and the third provides a voltage
proportional to the current being sensed. This has several advantages; no resistance
(a “shunt”) need be inserted in the primary circuit. Also, the voltage present on the
line to be sensed is not transmitted to the sensor, which enhances the safety of
measuring equipment.
The range of a given feed through sensor may be extended upward and downward
by appropriate wiring. To extend the range to lower currents, multiple turns of the
current-carrying wire may be made through the opening. To extend the range to
higher currents, a current divider may be used. The divider splits the current across
two wires of differing widths and the thinner wire, carrying a smaller proportion of
the total current, passes through the sensor.

40
a) Split ring clamp-on sensor
A variation on the ring sensor uses a split sensor which is clamped onto the line
enabling the device to be used in temporary test equipment. If used in a permanent
installation, a split sensor allows the electrical current to be tested without
dismantling the existing circuit.

b) Analog multiplication
The output is proportional to both the applied magnetic field and the applied sensor
voltage. If the magnetic field is applied by a solenoid, the sensor output is
proportional to product of the current through the solenoid and the sensor voltage.
As most applications requiring computation are now performed by small (even tiny)
digital computers, the remaining useful application is in power sensing, which
combines current sensing with voltage sensing in a single Hall effect device.

c) Power sensing
By sensing the current provided to a load and using the device’s applied voltage as
a sensor voltage it is possible to determine the power flowing through a device. This
power is (for direct current devices) the product of the current and the voltage. With
appropriate refinement the devices may be applied to alternating current
applications where they are capable of reading the true power produced or
consumed by a device.

d) Position and motion sensing

Hall Effect devices used in motion sensing and motion limit switches can offer
enhanced reliability in extreme environments. As there are no moving parts
involved within the sensor or magnet, typical life expectancy is improved compared
to traditional electromechanical switches. Additionally, the sensor and magnet may
be encapsulated in an appropriate protective material.

e) Automotive ignition and fuel injection

If the magnetic field is provided by a rotating magnet resembling a toothed gear, an
output pulse will be generated each time a tooth passes the sensor. This is used in

41
modern automotive primary distributor ignition systems, replacing the earlier
“breaker” points (which were prone to wear and required periodic adjustment and
replacement). Similar sensor signals are used to control multi-port sequential fuel
injection systems, where each cylinder’s intake runner is fed fuel from an injector
consisting of a spray valve regulated by a solenoid. The sequences are timed to
match the intake valve openings and the duration of each sequence (controlled by a
computer) determines the amount of fuel delivered.

f) Wheel rotation sensing

The sensing of wheel rotation is especially useful in anti-lock brake systems. The
principles of such systems have been extended and refined to offer more than anti-
skid functions, now providing extended vehicle “handling” enhancements

42
6. Bibliography
[ l] A.B. Fowler, F.F. Fang, W.E. Howard and P.J. Stiles Phys. Rev. Letter 16, 901
( 1966)
[ 2] For a review see: Proceedings of the Int. Conf. on Electronic Properties of Two-
Dimensional Systems, Surf. Sci. 58, (1976), 73 (1978), 98 (1980, 113 (1982), 142
( 1984)
[ 3] F. Stern and W.E. Howard, Phys. Rev. 163, 816 (1967)
[ 4] T. Ando, J. Phys. Soc., Jpn. 51, 3893 (1982)
[ 51 J.F. Koch, Festkörperprobleme (Advances in Solid State Physics), H.J.
Queisser, Ed. (Pergamon-Vieweg, Braunschweig, 1975) Vol. XV, p. 79
[ 6] T. Mimura, Surf. Science 113, 454 (1982)
[ 7] R.B. Laughlin, Surface Science 113, 22 (1982)
[ 8] R. Kubo, S.J. Miyake and N. Hashitsume, in Solid State Physics, Vol. 17, 269
(1965). F. Seitz and D. Turnball, Eds., (Academic Press, New York, 1965)
[ 9] T. Ando, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 37, 1233 (1974)
[10] R. B. Laughlin in Springer Series in Solid State Sciences 53, p. 272, G. Bauer,
F.Kuchar and H. Heinrich, Eds. (Springer Verlag, 1984)
[11] R.E. Prange, Phys. Rev. B 23, 4802 (1981)
[12] H. Aoki and T. Ando, Solid State Commun. 38, 1079 (1981)
[13] J. T. Chalker, J. Phys. C 16, 4297 (1983)
[14] W. Brenig, Z. Phys. .50B, 305 (1983)
[15] A. Mac Kinnon, L. Schweitzer and B. Kramer, Surf. Sci. 142, 189 (1984)
[16] T. Ando, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 52, 1740 (1983)
[17] L. Schweitzer, B. Kramer and A. Mac Kinnon, J. Phys. C 17, 4111 (1984)
[18] H. Aoki and T. Ando, Phys. Rev. Letters 54, 831 (1985)
[19] E. Abrahams, P.W. Anderson, D.C. Licciardello and T.V. Ramakrishnan,
Phys.Rev. Letters 42, 673 (1979)
[20] G.A. Baraff and D.C. Tsui, Phys. Rev. B 24, 2274 (1981)
[21] T. Toyoda, V. Gudmundsson and Y. Takahashi, Phys. Letters 102A, 130 (1984)
[22] S. Kawaji and J, Wakabayashi, Surf. Schi. 58, 238 (1976)
[23] S. Kawaji, T. Igarashi and J. Wakabayashi, Progr. in Theoretical Physics 57,
176 (1975)
[24] T. Englert and K. v. Klitzing, Surf. Sci. 73, 70 (1978)

43
[25] K. v. Klitzing, G. Dorda and M. Pepper, Phys. Rev. Letters 45, 494 (1980)
[26] K. v. Klitzing, H. Obloh, G. Ebert, J, Knecht and K. Ploog, Prec. Measurement
and Fundamental Constants II, B.N. Taylor and W.D. Phillips, Eds., Natl. Burl.
Stand. (U.S.), Spec. Publ. 617, (1984) p. 526
[27] R.W. Rendell and S.M. Girvin, Prec. Measurement and Fundamental Constants
II, B.N. Taylor and W.D. Phillips. Eds. Natl. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Spec. Publ. 617,
(1984) p. 557
[28] K. v. Klitzing, Festkörperprobleme (Advances in Solid State Physics), XXI, 1
(1981), J. Treusch, Ed., (Vieweg, Braunschweig)
[29] G. Ebert, K. v. Klitzing, C. Probst and K. Ploog, Solid State Commun. 44, 95
(1982)
[30] E. Stahl, D. Weiss, G. Weimann, K. v. Klitzing and K. Ploog, J. Phys. C 18, L
783 (1985)

44