1: %\documentclass[showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
2: \documentclass[showpacs,superscriptaddress,twocolumn,aps,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
3:
4: \usepackage{amsfonts}
5: \usepackage{amsmath}
6: \usepackage{graphicx}
7: \usepackage{dcolumn}
8: \usepackage{bm}
9:
10: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
11: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
12: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
13: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
14: \newcommand{\Fig}[1]{Fig.\ref{#1}}
15: \newcommand{\Eq}[1]{Eq.\,(\ref{#1})}
16: \newcommand{\Eqs}[1]{Eqs.\,(\ref{#1})}
17: \newcommand{\dg}{\dagger}
18: \newcommand{\la}{\langle}
19: \newcommand{\ra}{\rangle}
20: \newcommand{\nl}{\nonumber \\}
21: \newcommand{\eph}{\emph{e-ph}\ }
22: \newcommand{\Tab}[1]{Table\ \ref{#1}}
23: \newcommand{\Sec}[1]{Sec.\,\ref{#1}}
24: \newcommand{\Sch}{Schr\"{o}dinger\ }
25: \newcommand{\mbpar}[1]{\left( #1 \right)}
26: \newcommand{\mint}[2]{\int\limits_{#1}^{#2}}
27:
28: %\bibliographystyle{acs}
29: %\bibliographystyle{apsrev}
30: %\bibliographystyle{pf}
31:
32: \begin{document}
33:
34:
35: \title{Bias-induced insulator-metal transition in organic electronics}
36: \author{J.~H.~Wei}
37: \affiliation{Department of Physics, Renmin University of China,
38: Beijing, China} \affiliation{Department of Physics, Shandong
39: University, Jinan, China}
40:
41: \author{S.~J.~Xie}
42: \affiliation{Department of Physics, Shandong University, Jinan,
43: China}
44:
45: \author{L.~M.~Mei}
46: \affiliation{Department of Physics, Shandong University, Jinan,
47: China}
48:
49: \author{YiJing Yan}
50: \affiliation{Department of Chemistry, Hong Kong University
51: of Science and Technology, Kowloon, Hong Kong}
52:
53: \date{\today}
54:
55: \begin{abstract}
56: We investigate the bias-induced insulator-metal transition
57: in organic electronics devices, on the basis of the
58: Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model [W.~P. Su, J.~R. Schrieffer, and A.~J. Heeger,
59: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 22}, 2099 (1980)] combined with the non-equilibrium
60: Green's function formalism. The insulator-metal
61: transition is explained with the energy levels
62: crossover that eliminates the Peierls phase [R.~Peierls,
63: {\em Quantum Theory of Solids}, Oxford University Press, Oxford,
64: 1955] and
65: delocalizes the electron states near the
66: threshold voltage. This may account for
67: the experimental observations on the devices
68: that exhibit intrinsic bistable conductance switching
69: with large on-off ratio.
70: \end{abstract}
71:
72: \pacs{71.30.+h, 72.80.Le, 73.63.-b}
73:
74: \maketitle
75: %
76: \clearpage
77:
78: In recent years molecular electronics,
79: which uses individual molecules as possible electrical switches,
80: has grown up rapidly since the discoveries of negative
81: differential resistance and
82: bistable conductance switching (CS) \cite{Che991550,Don012303}.
83: Individual molecules can be wired to serve as diodes, transistors,
84: and other electronic devices at the heart of
85: computer chips \cite{Ree013735,Col001172,Kra022927,Raw03377}.
86: For the next generation of technology,
87: molecular electronics should exhibit
88: a large on-off ratio ($>$\,50:1).
89: It should also be intrinsic and controllable, rather than
90: artificial due to for example metal filament \cite{Ser03556}.
91: Some mechanisms such as the conformational change \cite{Don012303},
92: charging effect and polaron models \cite{Gal05125,Wei0682} have
93: been proposed. However, none of them can fully account
94: for the large intrinsic on-off ratio
95: of molecular switching observed
96: in experiments \cite{Blu05167,Kum991645,Mat0512450}.
97: In this work, we shall propose another possible
98: mechanism, in which the
99: intrinsic CS with large on-off ratio
100: is controlled by the bias-triggered
101: Peierls phase elimination and energy levels crossover.
102:
103: Let us start with the following observations.
104: Most molecular devices use short-chain $\pi$-conjugated
105: organic molecules as the active region, and are
106: fabricated as metal-molecule-metal sandwiched structures.
107: A chain-like nanoscale organic molecule belongs to
108: the family of organic semiconductors (OSEs).
109: Physically, an OSE is charactered by the Peierls instability;
110: i.e., the strong electron-phonon ({\it e-ph})
111: interaction that induces the single--double bond alternation
112: and a relative large energy gap between highest-occupied and
113: lowest-unoccupied molecular orbital (HOMO and LUMO) \cite{Pei55}.
114: It is the Peierls instability that largely localizes
115: the $\pi$-electrons of carbon and contributes to
116: the low conductance of OSEs, no matter
117: they are fabricated via the bottom-up self-assembled monolayer
118: or the top-down lithography technique.
119: Apparently, delocalizing $\pi$-electrons will improve
120: the conductivity of OSEs. One method is the creation of
121: nonlinear excitations (solitons or polarons) to act as charge
122: carriers \cite{Su802099}. Another approach
123: is to eliminate the Peierls phase directly.
124: Increasing temperature may
125: melt the Peierls phase, leading to an insulator--metal
126: (I-M) transition \cite{Pei55}.
127: %
128:
129: An effective and controllable method
130: in electronics should however be the one triggered
131: by the bias or other external control field.
132: %%%
133: In this connection and also in contact
134: with some typical
135: experimental systems \cite{Kum991645,Mat0512450},
136: we present in this work a theoretical study
137: on the bias-induced I-M transition in a model
138: nanoscale metal/OSE/metal sandwich structure.
139: %
140: We will elucidate the fact that the bias-triggered
141: energy levels crossover and its resulting Peierls phase
142: elimination can largely account for the observed CS.
143:
144: We combine the celebrated Su-Schrieffer-Heeger (SSH) model \cite{Su802099}
145: and the nonequilibrium Green's function (NEGF)
146: formalism \cite{Kel641515,Bra02165401} to study organic
147: electronics. For the spin-independent charge transport considered
148: in this work, the SSH Hamiltonian
149: for the OSE electrons coupled adiabatically with the lattice
150: displacements assumes
151: \bea\label{SSH}
152: H_{O}&=&\sum_{n}
153: \Bigl\{\epsilon _{o}c_{n}^{+}c_{n}-
154: [t_{o}-(-1)^{n}t_{1}-\alpha _{o}y_{n}]\times
155: \nl &\ &
156: (c_{n}^{+}c_{n+1}+
157: c_{n+1}^{+}c_{n})\Bigr\}+\frac{K_{o}}{2}\sum_{n}y_{n}^{2}.
158: \eea%
159: Here, $c_{n}^{+}$ ($c_{n}$) denotes the creation
160: (annihilation) operator of an electron at the $n^{\mathrm{th}}$
161: site of the OSE, and $\epsilon _{o}$ the on-site energy,
162: $t_{o}$ the zero-displacement hopping integral,
163: and $t_{1}$ the nondegeneracy parameter,
164: respectively. The lattice distortion is written
165: in terms of the bond distances $\{y_{n}=u_{n+1}-u_{n}\}$
166: and treated classically, with
167: the spring constant $K_{o}$
168: and the adiabatic {\it e-ph}\
169: coupling constant $\alpha _{o}$.
170: The L and R electrodes are chosen to be an identical nonmagnetic metal.
171: They are individually described
172: by the one-dimensional single-band tight-binding Hamiltonian,
173: being of the on-site energy $\epsilon _{f}$ and the
174: nearest neighbor transfer integral $t_{f}$.
175:
176: At the mean-field level of correlations, one can evaluate the
177: current based on the NEGF formalism \cite{Kel641515,Bra02165401},
178: \begin{equation} \label{I-V}
179: I=\frac{2e}{h}\int\limits_{-\infty }^{\infty }
180: {\mbox{Tr}\left( \Gamma _{\mathrm{L}}G^{\rm r}
181: \Gamma _{\mathrm{R}}G^{\rm a}\right) }
182: [f(E,\mu _{\mathrm{L}})-f(E,\mu _{\mathrm{R}})]dE.
183: \end{equation}%
184: Here, $f(E,\mu _{\mathrm{L/R}})$ is the Fermi distribution
185: function at the lead chemical potential $\mu _{\mathrm{L/R}}$.
186: The trace term in the integrand is the transmission coefficient
187: function $T(E)$. The involving
188: $\Gamma _{\mathrm{L/R}}$ denotes the lead reservoir-induced
189: broadening matrix, while
190: $G^{\rm r}$ and $G^{\rm a}=(G^{\rm r})^{\dg}$ are the retarded
191: and the advanced single-particle Green's functions
192: for the central scattering region (S-region),
193: under a finite applied bias. This region
194: consists of the OSE together with a number of
195: metal atoms attached to each of its ends.
196: %%%
197: For a quantum open system, the effects
198: of both the charging from the electrodes and the
199: external potential from the bias voltage
200: are contained in the
201: nonequilibrium reduced density matrix,
202: $\rho =\frac{1}{2\pi }\sum_{\alpha
203: =\mathrm{L,R}} %\int\limits_{-\infty }^{\infty }
204: \int G^{\rm r}\Gamma _{\alpha}G^{\rm a}
205: f(E,\mu _{\alpha})dE$,
206: of the coupled {\it e-ph}\ system \cite{Bra02165401}.
207: The reduced density matrix should be evaluated
208: in a self-consistent manner,
209: together with the Poisson's
210: equation and the Hellman-Feynman (H-F)
211: variation theorem for lattice distortion:
212: $\partial \lbrack \mathrm{Tr}%
213: (H_{\mathrm{S}}\rho )]/\partial u_{n}=0$. The self-consistent
214: procedure as well as the time-to-voltage mapping method to handle
215: the time-dependent bias sweeping have been described
216: in detail elsewhere \cite{Wei0682,Wei0508417}.
217:
218: In the following calculation of the hysteretic $I-V$ characteristics,
219: we choose a constant rate of bias sweeping to be $0.1$ V/sec, as
220: both the numerical efficiency and the typical experimental value
221: being of $0.01\sim 0.1$ V/sec are concerned. Note also that
222: SSH+NEGF formulation includes two main approximations. The first
223: one is the static lattice description involving in the model
224: Hamiltonian and the aforementioned H-F variation theorem. This
225: approximation is valid when the lattice fluctuation time scale is
226: longer than the inverse coherent charge transfer coupling. The
227: second approximation is the meanfield treatment of
228: electron-electron correlation that involves in the NEGF
229: formulation and also the model Hamiltonian. This is a common
230: approach, especially in treating strong
231: {\it e-ph} systems.
232:
233: We choose the SSH parameters in \Eq{SSH} the
234: typical values:
235: $t_{o}=2.5$ eV, $t_{1}=0.04$ eV, $\alpha _{o}=4.2$ eV/\r{A},
236: and $K_{o}=21.0$ eV/\r{A}$^{2}$.
237: The transfer integral for metal electrodes
238: is $t_{f}=3.0$ eV to produce a wide
239: band (4$t_{f}$), and the metal-OSE
240: coupling transfer integral is
241: $t_{\rm metal-OSE}=0.5(t_{o}+t_{f})$.
242: Without losing generality,
243: we set $E_{\rm F}=\epsilon _{o}=\epsilon_{f}=0$,
244: where $E_{\rm F}$ is the equilibrium Fermi level at
245: the zero bias $V=0$.
246:
247: %\input{figcap1}
248:
249: We then calculate the nonlinear current [\Eq{I-V}] as a function
250: of sweeping bias of the model metal/OSE/metal electronics at
251: $T=11$ K by using the time-to-voltage mapping method \cite{Wei0508417}.
252: The resulting $I$-$V$ curve, presented in
253: \Fig{fig1}, clearly shows hysteretic CS characters.
254: Note that the model OSE is of $N_o=40$, which is about 5nm
255: and comparable to the
256: experiments in Refs.\ \onlinecite{Blu05167} and
257: \onlinecite{He0663}.
258: More than 30 years ago, Simmons
259: \emph{et al.}\ reported an
260: electroformed metal-insulator-metal diode
261: with reversible voltage memory effects \cite{Sim6777}.
262: Recently, Bozano {\it et al.}\
263: had also demonstrated a similar resistive
264: switching phenomenon in OSE layers \cite{Boz04607}.
265: They had proposed several necessary features of an operational
266: switch, as summarized in Ref.\ \onlinecite{Boz04607}.
267: In comparison with their experiments,
268: especially the Fig.\,3
269: in Ref.\ \onlinecite{Boz04607},
270: our model calculation dose possess most of the necessary features
271: they proposed. These include
272: (1) a distinct bistable on/off state
273: corresponding to low/high resistance with
274: an on-off ratio $\gtrsim$ 20:1;
275: (2) a local maximum in current $I_{\rm max}$ which
276: nonlinearly depends on the size of OSE and the metal-OSE
277: coupling (varying from several nA $\sim{\rm \mu}$A) at voltage $V_{\rm
278: max}$ ($\sim$ 4.5 V);
279: (3) a threshold of voltage $V_{\rm th}$
280: ($\sim$ 3.7 V) at which the high-current
281: (switch-on) state is established;
282: (4) reproducible switching and reading which can be
283: achieved with applied positive or negative voltage.
284: %%
285: The insert in \Fig{fig1} shows the
286: nonlinear dependence of the threshold voltage
287: $V_{\rm th}$ on the OSE chain length $N_o$.
288: This confirms the generality of our results
289: in organic electronics devices with different sizes.
290:
291: Let us discuss the mechanism of the bistable CS,
292: as indicated in \Fig{fig1}. The OSE substructure is found charge neutral,
293: indicating there are no charging and polaron effects
294: below the saturation voltage.
295: %
296: The abrupt increase of current near the threshold
297: $V_{\rm th}$ at 3.7 V should therefore be interpreted with
298: an alternative mechanism.
299: First of all, we shall show that the observed
300: abrupt current change relates to an I-M transition.
301: %
302: Presented in \Fig{fig2} are the changes of
303: transmission coefficient $T(E)$ and lattice distortion $y_n$
304: around the threshold voltage.
305: Evidently, the Peierls phase of the OSE substructure
306: is largely eliminated near $V_{\rm th}$.
307: The key features in \Fig{fig2} include
308: (1) the rapid increasing of transmission coefficient in
309: the window between the indicated $\mu_{\rm L}$
310: and $\mu_{\rm R}$ in \Fig{fig2}(a);
311: (2) the distinct reducing of the lattice distortion
312: or single-double bond alternation [\Fig{fig2}(b)];
313: and also (3) the vanishing of the energy gap
314: and the merging of valence and conductance bands,
315: which will be explained later, cf.\ \Fig{fig3}(a).
316: The above features all indicate an I-M transition
317: around $V_{\rm th}$.
318: %
319: When the bias sweeps down, the Peierls
320: phase, as indicated by the lattice distortion
321: in \Fig{fig2}(b) (see also \Fig{fig3} for energy gap),
322: is reformed resulting in a metal-insulator (M-I)
323: transition around 2.8 V.
324: %
325: The delayed M-I transition, in comparing with
326: the I-M transition voltage, is due to
327: the lattice distortion reorganization,
328: resulting in the hysteretic loop ($\sim 1$ V)
329: in the $I$-$V$ curve in \Fig{fig1}.
330:
331: %\input{figcap2}
332:
333: To further elucidate the bias-induced
334: I-M/M-I transition mechanism, we also calculate the
335: `reduced' energy levels and wave functions of the OSE substructure
336: by diagonalizing its Hamiltonian. It consists of \Eq{SSH}, with
337: the nonequilibrium lattice parameters being
338: evaluated in the self-consistent
339: manner as described earlier.
340: The Hamiltonian contains also the
341: electric potential variation in the OSE structure,
342: which had also been determined self-consistently.
343: The informations on this Hamiltonian are
344: shown to be able to reflect the bias-induced intrinsic
345: changes of the OSE in the device.
346:
347: The resulting energy levels from the
348: aforementioned self-consistent Hamiltonian, as they vary
349: with the up-sweeping and down-sweeping bias voltage,
350: are reported in \Fig{fig3}, in which only
351: six of them, HOMO-2, $\cdots$, LUMO+2, are examined, since they
352: dominate most of the properties of the OSE during bias sweeping.
353: The most striking feature of \Fig{fig3} is the bias-induced energy
354: levels crossover. It occurs twice in the bias sweep-up
355: [\Fig{fig3}(a)] but only once in the sweep-down direction
356: [\Fig{fig3}(b)]. The first crossover in \Fig{fig3}(a) does not
357: increase the current. Detailed analysis finds it due to the fact
358: that the corresponding HOMO and LUMO states are localized near the
359: metal-OSE interfaces by the surface vibration modes (not shown here
360: due to space limitation). Note that the HOMO/LUMO here is a reduced state
361: in the presence of electrodes and lattice.
362: Unlike the first crossover, the second one, shown by the
363: dual-crossing between the HOMO and LUMO+1
364: and between the LUMO and HOMO-1 as indicated
365: by the arrows in \Fig{fig3}(a) around $V_{\rm th}$,
366: does increase the current, as it affects the system remarkably.
367: It combines the
368: valence and conductance bands of the OSE to form a single metallic
369: band structure without energy gap;
370: and meanwhile it also {\it completely
371: delocalizes} the wave functions
372: of those six levels over the whole OSE substructure
373: The gap-free metallic band structure
374: and the delocalized wave functions,
375: together with the uniform valence bonds [cf.\ \Fig{fig2}(b)]
376: around the second crossover,
377: are highly advantageous to the transport of $\pi$-electrons.
378: They lead to the I-M transition of the organic electronics
379: with rapidly increasing current around the $V_{\rm th}$.
380:
381: In a similar but reversible manner,
382: when the bias sweeps down the energy levels
383: crossover at $V \sim 2.8$\,V
384: re-opens the band gap [\Fig{fig3}(b)],
385: re-localizes the electronic
386: wave functions, and re-dimerizes the lattice displacements of the OSE.
387: As results, the OSE substructure transforms
388: from the metallic back to the insulating state (M-I transition)
389: with the current sudden drop following
390: a near-linear decrease (cf.\ \Fig{fig1}).
391:
392: Some experimental evidences of the bias-induced I-M transition
393: have been reported in large size organic electronics.
394: One is the bias-driven high-to-low resistive state
395: transition in the
396: alkali-7,7,8,8-tetracyanoquinodimethane (K-TCNQ) single crystals,
397: a quasi-one dimensional organic charge-transfer complex
398: (Mott-Peierls insulator) \cite{Kum991645}.
399: The I-M transition occurs in this system
400: at about several hundred of volt in low temperature, where
401: a metallic path has been visualized with a microscope.
402: %
403: The present study may also shed some light on understanding
404: the experimental observations in Ref.\ \onlinecite{Mat0512450}.
405: These include the conductance switching, hysteretic loop,
406: and `dimerization' reduction in the TTF-based dimeric
407: donor salt; cf.\ \Fig{fig1} here versus
408: the Fig.~2 of Ref.\ \onlinecite{Mat0512450}.
409: The detailed comparison between the
410: theory and experiments will be published
411: elsewhere.
412:
413: In summary, we have investigated the
414: bias-induced I-M transition
415: in organic electronics devices and
416: explained it with the energy
417: levels crossover which diminishes the Peierls phase and
418: delocalizes the electron states
419: at the threshold voltage.
420: The bias-triggered intrinsic large on-off
421: ratio in this work ($\gtrsim$ 20:1)
422: is experimental controllable. Our theory study reproduces a
423: range of experimental observations, such as
424: the I-M phase transition \cite{Kum991645,Mat0512450},
425: the hysteretic conductance switching \cite{Sim6777,Boz04607}.
426:
427:
428: Support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China
429: (Grants No.~10604037 and 10474056) and the Research Grants Council
430: of the Hong Kong Government (605105) is gratefully acknowledged.
431:
432: \begin{thebibliography}{20}
433:
434: \bibitem{Che991550}
435: J.~Chen, M.~A. Reed, A.~M. Rawlett, and J.~M. Tour,
436: \newblock Science {\bf 286}, 1550 (1999).
437:
438: \bibitem{Don012303}
439: Z.~J. Donhauser, B.~A. Mantooth, K.~F. Kelly, L.~A. Bumm, J.~D.
440: Monnell, J.~J.
441: Stapleton, D.~W.~P. Jr., A.~M. Rawlett, D.~L. Allara, J.~M. Tour, and P.~S.
442: Weiss,
443: \newblock Science {\bf 292}, 2303 (2001).
444:
445: \bibitem{Col001172}
446: C.~P. Collier, G.~Mattersteig, E.~W. Wong, Y.~Luo, K.~Beverly,
447: J.~Sampaio,
448: F.~M. Raymo, J.~F. Stoddart, and J.~R. Heath,
449: \newblock Science {\bf 289}, 1172 (2000).
450:
451: \bibitem{Kra022927}
452: I.~Kratochvilova, M.~Kocirik, A.~Zambova, J.~Mbindyo, T.~E.
453: Malloukc, and T.~S.
454: Mayer,
455: \newblock J. Mater. Chem. {\bf 12}, 2927 (2002).
456:
457: \bibitem{Raw03377}
458: A.~M. Rawlett, T.~J. Hopson, I.~Amlani, R.~Zhang, J.~Tresek, L.~A.
459: Nagahara,
460: R.~K. Tsui, and H.~Goronkin,
461: \newblock Nanotechnology {\bf 14}, 377 (2003).
462:
463: \bibitem{Ree013735}
464: M.~A. Reed, J.~Chen, A.~M. Rawlett, D.~W. Price, and J.~M. Tour,
465: \newblock Appl. Phys. Lett. {\bf 78}, 3735 (2001).
466:
467: \bibitem{Ser03556}
468: R.~F. Service,
469: \newblock Science {\bf 302}, 556 (2003).
470:
471: \bibitem{Gal05125}
472: M.~Galperin, M.~A. Ratner, and A.~Nitzan,
473: \newblock Nano Lett. {\bf 5}, 125 (2005).
474:
475: \bibitem{Wei0682}
476: J.~H. Wei, S.~J. Xie, L.~M. Mei, J.~Berakdar, and Y.~J. Yan,
477: \newblock New J. Phys. {\bf 8}, 82 (2006).
478:
479: \bibitem{Blu05167}
480: A.~S. Blum, J.~G. Kushmerick, D.~P. Long, C.~H. Patterson, J.~C.
481: Yang, J.~C.
482: Henderson, Y.~X. Yao, J.~M. Tour, R.~Shashidhar, and B.~R. Ratna,
483: \newblock Nature Mater. {\bf 4}, 167 (2005).
484:
485: \bibitem{Kum991645}
486: R.~Kumai, Y.~Okimoto, and Y.~Tokura,
487: \newblock Science {\bf 284}, 1645 (1999).
488:
489: \bibitem{Mat0512450}
490: M.~M. Matsushita and T.~Sugawara,
491: \newblock J. Am. Chem. Soc. {\bf 127}, 12450 (2005).
492:
493: \bibitem{Pei55}
494: R.~Peierls,
495: \newblock {\em Quantum Theory of Solids},
496: \newblock Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1955.
497:
498: \bibitem{Su802099}
499: W.~P. Su, J.~R. Schrieffer, and A.~J. Heeger,
500: \newblock Phys. Rev. B {\bf 22}, 2099 (1980).
501:
502: \bibitem{Bra02165401}
503: M.~Brandbyge, J.~L. Mozos, P.~Ordej\'on, J.~Taylor, and
504: K.~Stokbro,
505: \newblock Phys. Rev. B {\bf 65}, 165401 (2002).
506:
507: \bibitem{Kel641515}
508: L.~V. Keldysh,
509: \newblock Zh.\ Eksp.\ Teor.\ Fiz. {\bf 47}, 1515 (1964),
510: \newblock [Sov.~Phys.~JETP {\bf 20}, 1018 (1965)].
511:
512: \bibitem{Wei0508417}
513: J.~H. Wei, S.~J. Xie, L.~M. Mei, and Y.~Yan,
514: \newblock Organic Electronics, DOI: 10.1016/j.orgel.2007.03.002
515:
516:
517: \bibitem{He0663}
518: J.~L. He, B.~Chen, A.~K. Flatt, J.~J. Stephenson, C.~D. Doyle, and
519: J.~M. Tour,
520: \newblock Nature Mater. {\bf 5}, 63 (2006).
521:
522: \bibitem{Sim6777}
523: J.~G. Simmonsa and R.~R. Verderbe,
524: \newblock Proc. Roy. Soc. A. {\bf 301}, 77 (1967).
525:
526: \bibitem{Boz04607}
527: L.~D. Bozano, B.~W. Kean, V.~R. Deline, J.~R. Salem, and J.~C.
528: Scotta,
529: \newblock Appl. Phys. Lett. {\bf 84}, 607 (2004).
530:
531: \end{thebibliography}
532:
533:
534:
535: \clearpage
536:
537: \begin{figure}
538: \includegraphics[width=3.in]{fig1.eps}
539: \caption{The hysteretic current as the function of sweeping bias
540: of the model metal/OSE/metal electronics at $T=11$ K.
541: The size of OSE is $N_o=40$ and the linear voltage
542: sweep rate is at 0.1 V/sec.
543: The insert is the threshold voltage $V_{\rm th}$
544: as a function of the OSE chain
545: length $N_o$.}
546: \label{fig1}
547: \end{figure}
548:
549: \begin{figure}
550: \includegraphics[width=3. in]{fig2.eps}
551: \caption{(color online) High (solid lines) and low (dash-dot lines) conductance
552: states triggered by the up-sweeping bias.
553: (a) Transmission coefficient $T(E)$. The vertical
554: dot lines indicate the window between
555: $\mu_{\rm L}$ and $\mu_{\rm R}$ for the charge
556: transmission; (b) Lattice distortion $y_n\equiv u_{n+1}-u_n$
557: of the OSE substructure.}
558: \label{fig2}
559: \end{figure}
560:
561:
562: \begin{figure}
563: \includegraphics[width=3. in]{fig3.eps}
564: \caption{(color online) The voltage-evolution of six energy levels
565: of the OSE (HOMO-2, $\cdots$, LUMO+2) for up-sweeping (a) and
566: down-sweeping bias (b). The arrows indicate the crossover of
567: energy levels.}
568: \label{fig3}
569: \end{figure}
570:
571: \end{document}
572: )
573: