1: % \documentclass[aps,twocolumn,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
2: % \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
3: \documentclass[preprint,aps,amsmath,amssymb,showpacs]{revtex4}
4:
5: % Some other (several out of many) possibilities
6: %\documentclass[preprint,aps]{revtex4}
7: %\documentclass[preprint,aps,draft]{revtex4}
8: %\documentclass[prb]{revtex4}% Physical Review B
9:
10: \bibliographystyle{apsrev}
11:
12: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
13: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
14: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
15:
16: \begin{document}
17:
18: \title{Vertical Confinement and Evolution of Reentrant Insulating
19: Transition in the Fractional Quantum Hall Regime}
20: % \title{Reentrant Insulating Phase near $\nu = 1/3$ Fractional Quantum
21: % Hall Effect in a Vertically Confined Two-Dimensional Electron System}
22:
23: \author{I. Yang$^{1}$, W. Kang$^{1}$, S.T. Hannahs$^{2}$, L.N. Pfeiffer$^{3}$,
24: and K.W. West$^{3}$}
25:
26: \affiliation{
27: $^{1}$James Franck Institute and Department of Physics,
28: University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637\\
29: $^{2}$National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, 1800 East Paul
30: Dirac Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32310\\
31: $^{3}$Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies, 600 Mountain
32: Avenue, Murray Hill, New Jersey 07974}
33:
34: \date{\today}
35:
36: \begin{abstract}
37: We have observed an anomalous shift of the high field reentrant insulating
38: phases in a two-dimensional electron system (2DES) tightly confined
39: within a narrow GaAs/AlGaAs quantum well. Instead of the well-known
40: transitions into the high field insulating states centered around
41: $\nu = 1/5$, the 2DES confined within an 80\AA-wide quantum well exhibits
42: the transition at $\nu = 1/3$. Comparably large quantum lifetime of the 2DES
43: in narrow well discounts the effect of disorder and points to
44: confinement as the primary driving force behind the evolution of the
45: reentrant transition.
46: \end{abstract}
47:
48: \pacs{73.43.-f}
49:
50: \maketitle
51:
52: The prospect for a quantum Wigner crystal has driven the study of
53: two-dimensional electron system (2DES) under the conditions of
54: low temperature and high magnetic field\cite{WignerCrystal}.
55: Experiments on high mobility GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructures have
56: shown that in the limit of zero temperature the $\nu = p/(2p \pm 1),
57: p = 1, 2, 3\ldots$ series of incompressible quantum liquid states of
58: fractional quantum Hall effect (FQHE) terminates with a transition
59: into a field-induced insulator at low fillings. A dramatic sequence
60: of transitions involving a reentrant insulating phase, a $\nu = 1/m$
61: primary FQHE state, and the final insulating phase can be realized
62: in the highest quality samples.
63: Initially observed in 2DES around the $\nu = 1/5$ FQHE\cite{Jiang90}, the
64: reentrant insulating phase has been also detected adjacent to the
65: $\nu = 1/3$ FQHE state in two-dimensional hole system (2DHS)\cite{Santos92}.
66: Reentrant insulating behavior is also seen in high quality
67: silicon MOSFET and $p$-SiGe heterostructures
68: in the integer quantum Hall regime\cite{D'Iorio92,Kravchenko95,Sakr01}.
69: Because of the correlated nature of the FQHE, the insulating states
70: above and below the FQHE states at $\nu = 1/3$ and 1/5 are expected
71: to be driven by electron-electron correlation rather than disorder,
72: enhancing the likelihood of formation of a Wigner crystal. This has
73: given impetus for various electrical, acoustic, microwave, and optical
74: investigations of the high field insulating
75: phases\cite{Goldman90,Li91,Williams91,Buhmann91,Paalanen92,Goldys92,Manoharan94,Li97,Pan02}.
76:
77: For an ideal, disorder-free 2DES, the ground state in the limit of zero
78: temperature is an ordered electron crystal at small Landau level fillings.
79: However, a positive confirmation of the Wigner
80: crystalline order has remained controversial and somewhat elusive. This
81: is partly due to absence of scattering experiments that can directly probe
82: the crystalline order of the insulating phases. In addition,
83: interpretation of various experiments in the Wigner crystalline regime
84: is complicated by general lack of understanding of the effects of
85: disorder in presence of strong interaction.
86: Even the highest quality samples presently available possess
87: non-negligible disorder at low fillings, and the competition of
88: disorder and interaction is thought to modify the ground state
89: of 2D systems in some fundamental way. At short distances, the
90: ground state is conjectured to evolve into a partially ordered Wigner
91: crystal consisting of finite-size domains that are pinned by the disorder
92: potential\cite{WignerCrystal}. In presence of strong disorder, the ground
93: state evolves into a disorder-driven correlated insulator called
94: Hall insulator\cite{Kivelson92,Shahar95,Wong96}.
95:
96: In this paper we present an unexpected observation of reentrant
97: insulating phase around the $\nu = 1/3$ FQHE state in a two-dimensional
98: {\it electron} system. The 2DES in question is found in
99: a GaAs/AlGaAs quantum well whose narrow width produces a tight
100: vertical confinement of the electronic wave function.
101: In spite of its relatively low mobility, we observe a clear sequence
102: transitions to an insulator, a FQHE, and back to an insulating phase
103: in the vicinity of $\nu = 1/3$ filling in a fashion reminiscent of the
104: Wigner crystalline regime in high mobility $n-$ and $p$-type
105: GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructure.
106: Tilted magnetic field study shows that the insulating phases are found
107: to be insensitive to the presence of parallel magnetic field. We also
108: compare the properties of the 2DES in the NQW with a wider quantum well
109: and the conventional heterostructure. We find that the single particle
110: lifetime of the 2DES in NQW is comparable to other higher mobility specimen
111: and conclude that confinement within the NQW may be responsible for the
112: shift in the reentrant transition.
113:
114: The experiment was performed using a modulation doped AlGaAs/GaAs
115: quantum well of 80-\AA\ in width. The density of the sample was $n =
116: 1.1 \times 10^{11} \rm{cm}^{-2}$ with a low temperature mobility of $2.56
117: \times 10^{5} \rm{cm}^{2}/\rm{V~sec}.$ The transport in narrow
118: quantum well (NQW) is dominated by interfacial fluctuations\cite{Motohisa92},
119: yielding
120: a substantially lower mobility than comparable heterostructure samples.
121: Samples in Hall bar and van der Pauw configurations were studied
122: inside a dilution refrigerator with a 14 tesla superconducting magnet.
123: Tilted-field study was performed up to 40 tesla using the
124: hybrid magnet at the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory.
125: A light emitting diode
126: was used to illuminate the sample at low temperatures.
127: Depending on the illumination conditions
128: and the thermal cycling history, small variation in the data was detected.
129: This, however, does not alter our conclusions.
130:
131:
132: Fig. \ref{fig:narrow1} illustrates the magnetoresistance $R_{xx}$ of
133: a NQW sample at a
134: temperature of 35 mK. The most striking feature of the data is the
135: sharp increase of longitudinal resistance between $\frac{1}{3} < \nu < 0.45$.
136: Slightly after $\nu = 1/2$ $R_{xx}$ increases dramatically by more
137: than 2 orders of magnitude, completely overwhelming other transport
138: features. The peak resistance at $\nu = 0.38$ exceeds $900 \rm{k}\Omega$
139: before dropping precipitously as it enters the $\nu = 1/3$ FQHE
140: state. $R_{xx}$ subsequently diverges upon entering a high field
141: insulating phase. The inset of Fig. \ref{fig:narrow1} illustrates
142: longitudinal and Hall resistances of the same sample under a
143: different illumination condition. The $R_{xy}$ is quantized at
144: $3h/e^{2}$ at $\nu = 1/3$, demonstrating the formation of the
145: $\nu = 1/3$ FQHE state. The $\nu = 3/7$
146: FQHE state is found as a weak $R_{xx}$ minimum prior to the
147: reentrant insulating phase.
148:
149: Fig. \ref{fig:narrow2} shows the temperature dependence of the
150: insulating state at a
151: slightly higher density ($n = 1.2 \times 10^{11} \rm{cm}^{-2}$). As
152: temperature is raised, $R_{xx}$ decreases sharply with the insulating
153: features largely disappearing above T = 300 mK.
154: The inset of Fig. \ref{fig:narrow2}
155: shows an Arrhenius plot of peak resistance at $\nu =
156: 0.38$. The resistance at the peak is activated with an activation
157: energy of $E_{g} \sim 0.26 $K.
158: At lower temperatures, there is a
159: saturation of the resistivity. Measurement of I-V characteristics
160: shows that the transport in the insulating regime is highly
161: nonlinear, similar to previously observed
162: reentrant insulating
163: phases\cite{Jiang90,Santos92,Goldman90,Li91,Williams91,D'Iorio92,Kravchenko95,Sakr01}.
164:
165: Fig. \ref{fig:narrow3} shows the effect of parallel magnetic field
166: in the insulating regime above and below the $\nu = 1/3$ FQHE state.
167: Comparison of magnetoresistance for the tilt angle of $\theta =
168: 0^{\circ}$ and $\theta = 58^{\circ}$ at T = 50 mK shows that there
169: is no appreciable change in both $\nu = 1/3$ FQHE state and the
170: insulating states above and below $\nu = 1/3$ even though the total
171: magnetic field was nearly double of the perpendicular magnetic field.
172: This shows that neither the increase in the Zeeman energy nor the
173: deformation of the wave function due to strong parallel magnetic field
174: appears to play a large role in the insulating phase.
175:
176:
177:
178:
179: In Fig. \ref{fig:narrow4} we explore the role of vertical confinement
180: by comparing the transport between quantum well samples with different
181: widths. Fig. \ref{fig:narrow4}a illustrates magnetoresistance of our
182: 80\AA\ wide NQW. Fig. \ref{fig:narrow4}b illustrates the
183: magnetoresistance of a quantum well sample that is 300\AA\ wide and
184: possessing a mobility of $\mu = 7.8 \times 10^{6} cm^{2}/Vs$ and
185: a density of $n = 6.2 \times 10^{10} cm^{-2}.$ In the wider quantum
186: well specimen, magnetoresistance at 30 mK shows
187: a well-developed sequence of FQHE states centered around $\nu = 1/2$
188: and $\nu = 1/4$ followed by the reentrant insulating phase prior to the
189: $\nu = 1/5$ FQHE state. This contrasts sharply with the 80 \AA\ -wide
190: NQW which only exhibits a weakly developed FQHE state at $\nu = 2/3$
191: prior to the reentrant insulating state above $\nu = 1/3$. These
192: results suggest strongly that narrow confinement is likely to be
193: important in altering the properties of 2DES in the insulating regime.
194:
195: The prevailing view on the high field reentrant transitions in
196: various 2DES involves
197: either an entry into the Wigner crystalline regime\cite{WignerCrystal} or
198: an approach based on the global phase diagram of quantum Hall
199: effect\cite{Kivelson92}. Consideration of the former scenario follows
200: from the importance of the electron-electron interaction in the limit
201: of low fillings. Since the Laughlin states at $\nu = 1/m, m = 3, 5...$
202: occur from strong
203: electronic correlation\cite{Laughlin83}, it follows that the interaction
204: should also play an important role in the adjacent insulating states.
205: The reentrance is explained in terms of competition between the FQHE
206: liquid and Wigner solid. In this point of view, the insulating phases
207: seen in the NQW is likely to
208: be some kind of strongly correlated ground state driven by interaction.
209: Alternatively, the insulating phases in NQW may occur due to some electron
210: localization effect associated with disorder as suggested by its modest
211: mobility. In this context, the global phase diagram picture of quantum
212: Hall transitions\cite{Kivelson92} is relevant as a transition
213: from an insulator into a FQHE state at $\nu = 1/3$ is permitted.
214:
215: However, in either pictures, there is no obvious explanation for
216: the shift in the reentrant insulating transition to $\nu = 1/3$ for
217: the 2DES in the NQW. This feature is particularly puzzling since
218: the reentrant behavior is always found near $\nu = 1/5$ in 2DES based
219: on GaAs/AlGaAs structures\cite{WignerCrystal,Jiang90}. In fact, the observed sequence
220: of transitions in NQW resembles the reentrant insulating transitions near
221: $\nu = 1/3$ in 2DHS in GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructure\cite{Santos92}.
222: In the reentrant insulating transitions seen in Si MOSFET and p-SiGe
223: heterostructure, the reentrant insulating phases are found in the integer
224: quantum Hall regime and spin is thought to play an important
225: role\cite{D'Iorio92,Kravchenko95,Sakr01}. In our NQW, tilted field experiment
226: appears to rule out the role of spin in the reentrant insulating phase.
227:
228: Theoretically the transition into a Wigner crystal in 2DES
229: is predicted for $\nu \leq 1/6.5$\cite{Lam84,Levesque84,Zhu95}.
230: In the case of 2DHS in GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructures, the stability of the
231: insulating phases near $\nu = 1/3$ is explained in terms of increased Landau
232: level mixing associated with its heavier effective mass
233: ($m^{*}_{h} = 0.3m_{\circ}$) compared to that of electrons
234: ($m^{*}_{e} = 0.067m_{\circ}$)\cite{Santos92,Zhu93,Price93}.
235: Since the effective mass of electrons in narrow quantum wells has
236: been shown to be comparable to heterostructures\cite{Huant92},
237: Landau level mixing does not appear to play a significant role in NQW.
238: As there is no universally accepted explanation for the reentrant transitions
239: observed in various two-dimensional semiconductor systems, understanding
240: of the shift in the reentrant behavior in the NQW is likely to be important
241: in clarifying the nature of the associated insulating phases.
242:
243: The role of disorder remains an important
244: question as the mobility of 2DES in NQW is modest compared to other
245: 2DES based on GaAs/AlGaAs quantum structures.
246: However, previous experiments on GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructures with mobilities
247: comparable to that of our NQW have not found reentrant behavior next to
248: the $\nu = 1/3$ FQHE state\cite{Shahar95,Wong96}. While this
249: appears to discount the importance of disorder associated with the
250: reentrant behavior in the NQW, interfacial roughness serves to
251: restrict the transport in narrow quantum wells\cite{Motohisa92} and
252: a more quantitative measure of disorder is necessary. This is
253: particularly important since electronic transport under magnetic
254: field is largely determined by large angle scattering instead of the small
255: angle scattering which dominates the zero field transport. The single
256: particle relaxation time, $\tau_{s}$, in semiconductors is consequently
257: substantially smaller than the transport scattering time,
258: $\tau_{t}$\cite{DasSarma85,Coleridge91}.
259:
260: In Table \ref{tab:table1} we summarize the
261: properties of 2DES derived from 3 different GaAs/AlGaAs structures that
262: exhibit reentrant insulating phase in the lowest Landau level. In addition
263: to the 80\AA\ quantum well, 2DES from a heterostructure and 300\AA\ quantum
264: well with mobilities that are respectively 10 and 30 times larger were
265: compared. $\tau_{t}$ was deduced from zero field mobility, $\mu =
266: e\tau_{t}/m^{*}$, and $\tau_{s}$ was determined from the Dingle analysis
267: of the Shubnikov-de Haas (SDH) oscillations as suggested by
268: Coleridge\cite{Coleridge91}. In contrast to the large differences
269: in $\tau_{t}$, we found that $\tau_{s}$'s determined from different structures
270: were surprisingly close. The $\tau_{s}$ in the high mobility
271: 300 \AA\ wide quantum well was 8.5 $ps$ with the 80 \AA\ NQW yielding
272: a $\tau_{s}$ of 3.7 $ps$. The heterostructure sample was
273: found to possess a $\tau_{s}$ comparable to other 2DES samples.
274:
275: The proximity of $\tau_{s}$'s is also reflected in the onset of SDH oscillations, $B_{onset}$. In
276: the insets of Fig. \ref{fig:narrow4} we show the SDH oscillations for
277: 80 \AA\ NQW and 300 \AA\ quantum well. A $B_{onset}$ of $\sim$ 60 mT
278: for the NQW and $\sim 30$mT for other samples were obtained. The
279: comparable $\tau_{s}$ and $B_{onset}$ suggest that
280: in spite of its low mobility, the electronic lifetime in NQW is not
281: adversely affected by the tight confinement, increasing the likelihood
282: that the reentrant behavior around $\nu = 1/3$ is driven by
283: interaction rather than disorder. On the other hand, the larger
284: resistivity at $\nu = 1/2$ and the absence of high order FQHE states
285: is consistent with presence of stronger disorder in the NQW than the
286: wider well. However, coexistence of the $\nu = 1/3$ FQHE state next
287: to the insulating phases indicates that disorder is not enough to
288: suppress the electron correlation in the limit of low fillings.
289:
290: Since the most distinguishing characteristic of the 2DES in a NQW involves its
291: vertical confinement, the physics of reentrance may potentially occur from
292: a confinement-induced evolution of the Coulomb interaction. The ground state
293: energy and the interaction parameters of 2DES depends on the finite vertical
294: extent of the electronic wave function\cite{Zhang86,Morf02}. A thicker 2DES
295: consequently experiences a softer
296: Coulomb potential and thereby possesses a reduced FQHE energy gap compared to a
297: thinner 2DES. Our estimate of the thickness of electrons based on the interaction
298: parameters in quantum wells\cite{DasSarma85a}
299: points to a substantial reduction in its thickness
300: compared to the 2DES found in heterostructures\cite{Morf02}. For the 2DES in
301: Table \ref{tab:table1}, we obtain a thickness of 128\AA\ in the heterostructure specimen
302: which contrasts sharply against the estimated thickness of 19\AA\ and 67\AA\ for
303: the 80\AA\ and 300\AA\ quantum wells. The role of thickness in the insulating
304: phases in 2DES remains unknown and further theoretical investigation is
305: necessary to clarify the effect of confinement in relation to the enhancement
306: of $r_{s}$ in the insulating regime.
307:
308: In summary, we have observed a puzzling shift in the reentrant insulating
309: phases in a 2DES confined within a NQW. The apparent shift in the reentrant
310: transition to $\nu = 1/3$ cannot be reconciled in terms of disorder and points
311: to importance of confinement. Understanding the shift in the reentrant transition
312: may be important in uncovering the physics behind the reentrant insulating
313: phases in the NQW as well as other two-dimensional electron and hole systems.
314: While the confinement within a NQW is expected to produce a thinner 2DES, its
315: effect in the high field insulating states remains to be clarified.
316:
317: We would like to thank H. Fertig, H.W. Jiang, A.H. MacDonald, H.L.
318: Stormer, and D.C. Tsui for useful
319: discussions. A portion of this work was performed at the National
320: High Magnetic Field Laboratory which
321: is supported by NSF Cooperative Agreement No. DMR-9527035.
322: The work at the University of Chicago is supported by NSF
323: DMR-9808595 and DMR-0203679.
324:
325: \pagebreak
326:
327: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
328: \bibitem{WignerCrystal} See for example, review articles by H.A. Fertig and
329: M. Shayegan, in {\it Perspectives in Quantum Hall Effects,} edited by S.
330: Das Sarma and A. Pinczuk (Wiley, New York, 1996), and references therein.
331: \bibitem{Jiang90} H.W. Jiang {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 65}, 633 (1990).
332: \bibitem{Santos92} M.B. Santos {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 68}, 1188 (1992).
333: \bibitem{D'Iorio92} M.D. D'Iorio {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. B. {\bf 46}, 15992 (1992).
334: \bibitem{Kravchenko95} S. Kravchenko {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 75}, 910 (1995).
335: \bibitem{Sakr01} M.R. Sakr {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 64}, 161308R (2001).
336: \bibitem{Goldman90} V.J. Goldman {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 65} 2189 (1990).
337: \bibitem{Li91} Y.P. Li {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 67}, 1630 (1991).
338: \bibitem{Williams91} F.I.B. Williams {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 66}, 3285 (1991).
339: \bibitem{Buhmann91} H. Buhmann {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 66}, 926 (1991).
340: \bibitem{Paalanen92} M.A. Paalanen {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 45}, 11342 (1992).
341: \bibitem{Goldys92} E.M. Goldys {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 46}, 7957 (1992).
342: \bibitem{Manoharan94} H.C. Manoharan {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 50}, 17662 (1994).
343: \bibitem{Li97} C.C. Li {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 79}, 1353 (1997).
344: \bibitem{Pan02} W. Pan {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 88}, 176802 (2002).
345: \bibitem{Kivelson92} S. Kivelson {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 46}, 2223 (1992).
346: \bibitem{Shahar95} D. Shahar {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 74}, 4511 (1995).
347: \bibitem{Wong96} L.W. Wong {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 54}, 17323 (1996).
348: \bibitem{Motohisa92} J. Motohisa {\it et al}, Appl. Phys. Lett. {\bf 60}, 1315 (1992).
349: \bibitem{Lam84} P.K. Lam and S.M. Girvin, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 30}, 473 (1984).
350: \bibitem{Levesque84} D. Levesque {\it et al}, Phys. Rev.
351: B {\bf 30}, 1056 (1984).
352: \bibitem{Zhu95} X. Zhu and S.G. Louie, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 52}, 5863 (1995).
353: \bibitem{Zhu93} X. Zhu and S.G. Louie, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 70}, 335 (1993).
354: \bibitem{Price93} R. Price {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. Lett.
355: {\bf 70}, 339 (1993).
356: \bibitem{Huant92} S. Huant {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 46}, 2613 (1989).
357: \bibitem{Laughlin83} R.B. Laughlin, Phys. Rev. Lett {\bf 50},
358: 1395 (1983).
359: \bibitem{DasSarma85} S. Das Sarma and F. Stern, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 32}, 8442 (1985).
360: \bibitem{Coleridge91} P.T. Coleridge, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 44}, 3793 (1991).
361: \bibitem{Zhang86} F.C. Zhang {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 33}, 2903 (1986).
362: \bibitem{Morf02} R.H. Morf {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 66}, 075408 (2002).
363: \bibitem{Ortalano97} M.W. Ortalano {\it et al}, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 55}, 7702 (1997).
364: \bibitem{DasSarma85a} S. Das Sarma {\it et al}, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) {\bf 163}, 78 (1985).
365: \end{thebibliography}
366:
367: \pagebreak
368:
369: \begin{table*}
370: \caption{\label{tab:table1} Comparison of the
371: properties of two-dimensional electron systems in 80\AA\ GaAs/AlGaAs
372: quantum well, 300\AA\ GaAs/AlGaAs quantum well, and a GaAs/AlGaAs
373: heterostructures. All exhibit reentrant behavior in
374: the lowest Landau level.}
375: \begin{ruledtabular}
376: \begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
377: % \begin{tabular}{c.cc.c} \hline\hline
378: sample & density & mobility, $\mu$ & scattering
379: & onset of & single particle & $\tau_{t}/\tau_{s}$ & $\rho_{xx}$
380: at $\nu = 1/2$ & reentrance \\
381: & ($10^{11} {cm}^{-2}$) & ($\rm{cm}^{2}/\rm{Vs}$) & time, $\tau_{t}$$(ps)$ &
382: SDH (mT) & lifetime, $\tau_{s}$$(ps)$ & & ($k\Omega/\Box$) & \\
383: \hline
384: % \vspace*{1mm}
385: % &&&&&
386: 80\AA\ QW & 1.1 & $2.5 \times 10^{5}$ & 9.7 & 61 & 3.6 & 2.7 & 15.3 & $\nu = 1/3$ \\
387: % heterostructure & 1.1 & $6.5 \times 10^{6}$ & 248 & 46 & 5.5 & 45 & $\nu = 1/5$ \\
388: 300\AA\ QW & 0.62 & $7.8 \times 10^{6}$ & 297 & 29 & 8.5 & 35 & 0.241 & $\nu = 1/5$ \\
389: heterostructure & 0.53 & $2.5 \times 10^{6}$ & 95 & 30 & 6.7 &
390: 14 & 0.741 & $\nu = 1/5$ \\
391: % \hline\hline
392:
393: \end{tabular}
394: \end{ruledtabular}
395: \end{table*}
396:
397: \vspace*{4in}
398: \pagebreak
399:
400: \begin{figure}
401: % \vspace*{1.5in}
402: %\includegraphics[width=3.25in]{nqwfig1.eps}
403: \caption{\label{fig:narrow1}
404: Longitudinal magnetoresistance of a narrow quantum well at 35 mK.
405: Inset: longitudinal (blue) and transverse (red) magnetoresistivities of a sample
406: with a slightly higher density. Integers and fractions indicate the Landau level
407: filling of the two-dimensional electron system.}
408: \end{figure}
409:
410: \begin{figure}
411: % \vspace*{1.25in}
412: %\includegraphics[width=3.25in]{nqwfig2.eps}
413: \caption{\label{fig:narrow2} Longitudinal magnetoresistance of a narrow
414: quantum well at 32, 46, 60, 80, 100, 140, 210, 300 and 420 mK. Inset:
415: Arrhenius plot of the
416: resistivity at the peak of the reentrant insulating phase.}
417: \end{figure}
418:
419: \begin{figure}
420: % \vspace*{1.25in}
421: %\includegraphics[width=3.25in]{nqwfig3.eps}
422: \caption{\label{fig:narrow3} Magnetoresistance vs perpendicular
423: magnetic field for tilt angles at $\theta = 0^{\circ}$ (solid) and
424: $\theta = 58^{\circ}$ (dashed). The measurement was performed at
425: 50 mK.}
426: \end{figure}
427:
428: \begin{figure}
429: % \vspace*{1.25in}
430: %\includegraphics[width=3.25in]{nqwfig4.eps}
431: \caption{\label{fig:narrow4} Comparison of reentrant insulating
432: transitions in a 80 \AA\ (top) and 300 \AA\ (bottom) wide quantum well with
433: mobility of $2.5\times 10^5 cm^{2}/Vs$ and $7.8\times 10^{6}cm^{2}/Vs$,
434: respectively, at T $\approx 30mK$.
435: Insets: expanded view of the low field Shubnikov-de Haas (SDH)
436: oscillations. While the mobilities differ by a factor of $\sim$30,
437: the onsets of SDH oscillations differ by a factor of $\sim$2.}
438: \end{figure}
439:
440: \end{document}
441: