125, −0.145, and −0.165 V, respectively. It should be mentioned that we cannot use this SRT2104 method to obtain μ′ for T > 4 K since there is no apparent parabolic NMR, as shown in Figure 1a. The second method is based on the analysis of
σ xy using Equation 3, as shown in the inset to Figure 3 at the highest and lowest measured T. In this approach, n is determined from the SdH oscillations, from which the renormalized mobility can also be obtained at high T even without the parabolic negative MR induced by the diffusion correction. Here we limit the fitting intervals below 0.75 B max to avoid the regime near μ D B ~ 1, where B max denotes the field corresponding to the appearance of maximum σ xy at the lowest T. The fitting results are plotted at each V g as red symbols in Figure 6, allowing a comparison with those obtained by the first method. The figures show that μ′ is proportional selleck compound to T when T > 4 K. There is a clear discrepancy between the values obtained from the different AZD2171 cost fits at a relatively lower magnitude of V g, which can be ascribed to the background MR (as will be discussed further below). Nevertheless, both cases indicate that the ballistic contribution, defined as with μ D ≡ μ(T = 0K), has positive sign and therefore results in a partial cancelation of the diffusion correction.
This is consistent with the prediction that the influence of e-e interactions is weakened in systems with long-range scattering potentials. Figure 5 ρ xx as a function of B 2 for V g = −0.125 (a), −0.145 (b), and−0.165 (c) V. The straight
lines are provided as a guide to the eye to show the quadratic dependence on B. Figure 6 Renormalized mobility μ ′ as a function of T for V g = −0.125 (a), −0.145 (b), and−0.165 (c) V. The red and blue symbols DOCK10 denote the results obtained from the fits according to Equations 3 and 4, respectively. The insets are the zoom-ins of low-T results. The dotted lines represent the linear extrapolation of straight lines at T > 4 K. At high magnetic fields B > 1/μ D, semiclassical effects should affect the background resistance, resulting in either positive or negative MR [40, 41]. Therefore, it is not possible to obtain reliable values for μ′ from the first method. Here we use the value of μ′(T = 0K), obtained by linearly extrapolating the high-T results from the second method to T = 0 K [27, 34], to estimate μ D and so as to allow a discussion on the role of the non-oscillatory background. As demonstrated in Figure 6, the estimated values of μ D are 4.59, 3.79, and 2.89 m2/Vs for V g = −0.125, −0.145, and −0.165 V, respectively, from which the corresponding ratios of μ D/μ q (5.22, 4.51, and 3.75) are determined with μ q obtained by analyzing the amplitudes of SdH oscillations as shown in Figure 3.