arXiv:2109.09616v1 [math.AP] 20 Sep 2021
WITH SPIN-ORBIT INTERACTION
LUIGI BARLETTI, PHILIPP HOLZINGER, AND ANSGAR JÜNGEL
Abstract. Quantum drift-diffusion equations for a two-dimensional electron gas with spin-orbit interactions of Rashba type are formally derived from a collisional Wigner equation. The collisions are modeled by a Bhatnagar–Gross–Krook-type operator describing the relaxation of the electron gas to a local equilibrium that is given by the quantum maximum entropy principle. Because of non-commutativity properties of the operators, the standard diffusion scaling cannot be used in this context, and a hydrodynamic time scaling is required. A Chapman–Enskog procedure leads, up to first order in the relaxation time, to a system of nonlocal quantum drift-diffusion equations for the charge density and spin vector densities. Local equations including the Bohm potential are obtained in the semiclassical expansion up to second order in the scaled Planck constant. The main novelty of this work is that all spin components are considered, while previous models only consider special spin directions.
1. Introduction
Spintronics exploits the electron spin as a further degree of freedom in semiconductor materi- als. The objective of spintronics is to develop fast, high-capacity, and low-power information and communication devices. The design of spintronic structures is accelerated by numerical simula- tions that optimize the device properties. To achieve efficient but physically accurate simulations, macroscopic spin models, also including quantum features, are needed.
In the literature, usually simplified models are considered. A simple approach is to consider specific directions of the spin vector, for instance the spin-up and spin-down electron densities or, equivalently, the total density and the spin polarization [21]. A more complete picture is obtained by taking into account the complete spin vector and not only its projection on a given direction. Such models have four variables: the charge density and the densities of the three spin components [10, 18]. Quantum corrections have been included in the former approach in [3], leading to spinorial quantum drift-diffusion equations for the spin-up and spin-down densities, while the works [2, 18] are concerned with the derivation of full spin-vector models but without quantum corrections. Up to our knowledge, no drift-diffusion models with a full spin structure andquantum corrections have been derived in the literature so far. In this paper, we fill this gap
Date: September 21, 2021.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 35K55, 35Q40, 35Q81, 82B10.
Key words and phrases. Wigner–Boltzmann equation, diffusion limit, spin-orbit interaction, quantum maximum entropy principle, semiclassical model, Bohm potential.
The last two authors have been partially supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), grants P30000, P33010, F65, and W1245. This work received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, ERC Advanced Grant NEUROMORPH, no. 101018153.
1
by deriving spinorial quantum drift-diffusion equations for a two-dimensional electron gas from a collisional von Neumann equation.
1.1. Setting. We consider an electron gas confined in an asymmetric two-dimensional potential well. Then the electrons experience a spin-orbit interaction of Rashba type [4]. The Rashba effect is a momentum-based splitting of spin bands, which comes from the combined effect of spin-orbit interaction and an asymmetry of the potential. It manifests as an effective magnetic field orthogonal to the confinement direction and the electron motion; see Figure 1. The spin orientation can be indirectly controlled by the gate voltage, which deviates the electrons, thus changing the direction of the effective magnetic field. We refer to the review [22] for more details.
Figure 1. Left: A two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) is confined between two different semiconductor materials A and B (for instance, InAlAs and InGaAs).
Right: The electrons of the 2DEG experience an effective magnetic field 𝛼𝑅(𝑝×e3) orthogonal to both the electron momentum 𝑝 and the confinement direction e3, where 𝛼𝑅 > 0 and e3=(0, 0, 1)𝑇.
The motion of the confined electrons in the (𝑥1, 𝑥2)-plane is governed by the (scaled) von Neumann equation for the density operator ˆ𝜌(𝑡),
(1) i𝜀𝜏0𝜕𝑡ˆ𝜌 = [H𝜀, ˆ𝜌] := H𝜀ˆ𝜌 − ˆ𝜌H𝜀, 𝑡 >0,
where the (scaled) Hamiltonian H𝜀 is the sum of the kinetic energy, potential energy, and spin- orbit interaction,
(2) H𝜀 =
− 𝜀2
2Δ+ 𝑉 (𝑥)
𝜎0− 𝜀2𝛼
0 i𝜕𝑥2− 𝜕𝑥1
i𝜕𝑥2+ 𝜕𝑥1 0
.
Here, the function 𝑉 (𝑥) is the electric (gate) potential, 𝜎0 ∈ C2×2is the identity matrix, 𝜀 > 0 is the scaled Planck constant, 𝜏0is a scaled time, and 𝛼 > 0 is the scaled Rashba constant. We refer to Section 2.1 for details on the scaling.
Our derivation is based on the phase-space formulation using the Wigner transform 𝑊 :=
W ( ˆ𝜌), defined in (11) below. Then equation (1) transforms to the Wigner equation (see Lemma 6)
𝜏0𝜕𝑡𝑊 + T 𝑊 = 0, 𝑡 >0,
where T𝑊 = (i/𝜀)(𝐻𝜀#𝑊 − 𝑊#𝐻𝜀) is the transport operator, 𝐻𝜀 =W (H𝜀) is the Hamiltonian symbol, and # denotes the Moyal product defined in (14) below. To derive diffusion equations, we introduce a collision term of Bhatnagar–Gross–Krook (BGK) type:
(3) 𝜏0𝜕𝑡𝑊+ T 𝑊 = 1
𝜏(M(𝑁) − 𝑊), 𝑡 >0,
where 𝜏 > 0 is the (scaled) relaxation time, M(𝑁) = W(exp(−H𝜀+ ˜𝐴)) is the so-called quantum Maxwellian, which (formally) minimizes the quantum free energy under the constraint of a given density matrix 𝑁 = h𝑊i := ∫
R2𝑊 𝑑𝑝, and ˜𝐴 is the associated Lagrange multiplier; see Section 2.4 for details.
If the time scale 𝜏0is of the same order as the (scaled) relaxation time 𝜏, we obtain a diffusive scaling. The usual way to derive a macroscopic model is the Chapman–Enskog expansion. Let 𝑊𝜏
be a solution to (3) with 𝜏0 =𝜏and write 𝑊𝜏 =𝑊0+𝜏𝐺𝜏for two functions 𝑊0and 𝐺𝜏. The formal limit 𝜏 → 0 in (3) determines the first function, 𝑊0 =M(𝑁). The expansion 𝑊𝜏 =𝑊0+ 𝜏𝐺𝜏in fact defines 𝐺𝜏. Inserting this expansion into (3), dividing by 𝜏, and performing the formal limit 𝜏→ 0 leads to 𝐺 := lim𝜏→0𝐺𝜏 =−T M(𝑁). The last step is to integrate (3) with respect to 𝑝,
𝜕𝑡h𝑊𝜏i + 1
𝜏hT M(𝑁)i + hT 𝐺𝜏i = 0,
and to pass to the limit 𝜏 → 0. In the classical situation, T M(𝑁) is an odd function in 𝑝 and therefore, its integral with respect to 𝑝 vanishes. Physically, this means that the equilibrium state M(𝑁) has a vanishing diffusion current. The limit 𝜏 → 0 then leads to the macroscopic model 𝜕𝑡𝑁 − hT T M(𝑁)i = 0, where hT T M(𝑁)i is a drift-diffusion term. In the present case, however, it turns out that generally hT M(𝑁)i ≠ 0 (see Lemma 8). This means that there is a residual current in the equilibrium state that is due to the spin-orbit interaction. We show in Lemma 8 that the condition hT M(𝑁)i ≠ 0 can be characterized by the non-commutativity between the density matrix 𝑁 and the Lagrange multiplier ˜𝐴.
Therefore, we impose a hydrodynamic scaling, which is suitable for local equilibria with non- vanishing currents. We stress the fact that the BGK collisions do not conserve the current. The residual current T M(𝑁) is of quantum mechanical nature and in our case,it is of order 𝜀3(see (30) and (48)). We suppose that 𝜏0is of order one, while 𝜏 ≪ 1. Then the expansion 𝑊𝜏 =M(𝑁)+𝜏𝐺𝜏 in (3) leads to 𝐺𝜏 =−𝜕𝑡M(𝑁) − T M(𝑁) + 𝑂(𝜏). We integrate (3) with respect to 𝑝, divide the equation by 𝜏, and insert the expansion 𝑊𝜏 =M(𝑁) − 𝜏(𝜕𝑡M(𝑁) + T M(𝑁)) + 𝑂(𝜏2):
𝜕𝑡𝑁 =−hT M(𝑁)i = −hT M(𝑁)i + 𝜏hT 𝜕𝑡M(𝑁)i + 𝜏hT T M(𝑁)i + 𝑂(𝜏2).
Neglecting terms of order 𝑂(𝜏2), we arrive at our diffusion equation, with the diffusion contained in the term hT T M(𝑁)i. The task is to compute the expressions on the right-hand side in terms of the density matrix and related variables.
Our key assumption is that the spin density is of order 𝜀 ≪ 1. Physically, this means that the system is in a mixed state; the spin direction of the electrons is random, and a small polarisation emerges from the average. Mathematically, this assumption simplifies the semiclassical expansion of the model. Indeed, the explicit computations appear to be impractical when the spin density is of the same order as the charge density.
1.2. Main results. Expressing the density matrix in terms of the Pauli basis 𝜎0, . . . , 𝜎3 ∈ C2×2 (see Section 2.2), we write 𝑁 = 𝑛0𝜎0+ 𝜀n · σ, where the coefficients are the charge density 𝑛0
and the spin density 𝜀n, and n · σ := Í3
𝑗 =1𝑛𝑗𝜎𝑗. Similarly, we write the Lagrange multiplier matrix as ˜𝐴 = ˜𝑎0𝜎0+ ˜a · σ. We prove in Section 2.4 that actually ˜a = 𝜀a is of order 𝜀. Moreover, we show that the Pauli components of the density matrix solve a system of nonlocal diffusion equations.
Theorem 1 (Nonlocal quantum-spin model). Let 𝑊 be a solution to the Wigner–Boltzmann equation(28) and set 𝑁 = h𝑊i = 𝑛0𝜎0+ 𝜀n · σ. Let M(𝑁) be the quantum Maxwellian defined in Theorem 7, ˜𝐴 = ˜𝑎0𝜎0+ 𝜀a · σ be the matrix of Lagrange multipliers, and J = h𝑝M(𝑁)i be the full current density. Then, at first order in 𝜏, the Pauli components of 𝑁 solve the following equations:
𝜕𝑡𝑛0 =𝜏div 𝑛0∇𝑎0+ 𝑛0∇𝑉 + 𝜀2n· ∇a
+ 2𝛼𝜀2𝜏∇⊥ · (n × a), (4)
𝜕𝑡n =−2n × a + 𝜏 div
𝑛0∇a + n∇𝑎0+ n∇𝑉 + 2
𝜀J𝑇 × a
(5)
− 2𝛼𝜏
𝑛0∇⊥ × a + ∇⊥(𝑎0+ 𝑉) × n − 2
𝜀 ah𝑝⊥ · M(𝑁)i + J𝑇a⊥
− 4𝜀𝜏
(n × a) × a + n × 𝜕𝑡0a)
,
where 𝑎0 = ˜𝑎0− 𝑉, 𝜕𝑡0a is the lowest-order approximation of 𝜕𝑡a with respect to 𝜏, and∇⊥ =
∇ × e3=(𝜕𝑥2,−𝜕𝑥1,0)𝑇.
The Lagrange multipliers 𝑎0 and a are nonlocal functions of the densities 𝑛0 and n via the constraint hM(𝑁)i = 𝑁. System (4)–(5) is formally closed but in a very implicit way. The proof of the theorem is based on a specification of the quantum Maxwellian M(𝑁) and the transport operator T in terms of the Pauli basis. Our arguments are only formal since a rigorous treatment is, even in simple cases, out of reach. In the classical case 𝜀 = 0, equation (4) reduces to the standard drift-diffusion equation
𝜕𝑡𝑛0 =div(𝑛0∇𝑎0+ 𝑛0∇𝑉), where 𝑎0 =log(𝑛0/(2𝜋)).
The terms involving 𝛼 in (4)–(5) are coming from the Rashba interaction. The expression of order 𝜀−1in the second line of (5) can be reformulated by using the Grassmann vector identity as
ah𝑝⊥· M(𝑁)i + J𝑇a⊥ = h𝑝⊥× (a × M(𝑁)i.
This is exactly the corresponding expression in the model of [2, Formula (24)].
Since the semiclassical expansion of a is a = n/𝑛0+𝑂(𝜀2) (Lemma 10), we can write (4)–(5), up to 𝑂(𝜀2), as the following cross-diffusion system:
𝜕𝑡
𝑛0 n
=𝜏div
1 − 𝜀2|n/𝑛0|2 𝜀2n𝑇/𝑛0
−n/𝑛0 I
∇
𝑛0 n
+ 𝑓 (𝑛0,n,∇𝑛0,∇n),
where I is the identity matrix in R3×3and 𝑓 contains the lower-order terms. The density matrix is positive definite if 𝜀|n| < 𝑛0, and under this condition, the real parts of the eigenvalues of the
diffusion matrix are positive. This indicates that the nonlocal system is of parabolic type in the sense of Petrovskii.
Our second main result is a semiclassical expansion, up to second order, of the nonlocal model (4)–(5).
Theorem 2(Local quantum-spin model). Let 𝑁 = 𝑛0𝜎0+ 𝜀n · σ be a solution to (4)–(5). Then (𝑛0,n) solves, neglecting terms of order 𝑂(𝛼𝑚𝜀𝑛) with 𝑚 + 𝑛 > 2,
𝜕𝑡𝑛0=𝜏div
∇𝑛0+ 𝑛0∇𝑉 − 𝜀2
6𝑛0∇Δ√𝑛0
√𝑛0
(6) ,
𝜕𝑡n = 𝜏div(∇n + n∇𝑉) − 2𝛼𝜏(2∇⊥ × n + ∇⊥𝑉× n) − 4𝛼2𝜏(2n + n⊥⊥) (7)
+ 𝜀2 6
n
𝑛0 × 𝐵(𝑁) + 𝜀2𝜏
12 div n𝐴(𝑁) − ∇Δn + ∇n𝐶(𝑁) + 𝐵(𝑁)∇𝑛0+ 𝐷(𝑁) + 𝜀3𝜏
3 n×
n
𝑛0 × 𝐵(𝑁) − 𝐵(𝑁)
, wheren⊥⊥ = (−𝑛1,−𝑛2,0)𝑇,
𝐴(𝑁) = 2 ∇𝑛0
𝑛0 2∇𝑛0
𝑛0 − 4n 𝑛0 · ∇n
𝑛0 − ∇𝑛0 𝑛0
Δ𝑛0
𝑛0 − ∇𝑛0 𝑛0
(∇ ⊗ ∇)𝑛0 𝑛0 , 𝐵(𝑁) = Δn
𝑛0 − ∇n 𝑛0 · ∇𝑛0
𝑛0 =div
∇n 𝑛0
,
𝐶(𝑁) =
Δ𝑛0 𝑛0 −
∇𝑛0 𝑛0
2+ 4 n
𝑛0 2
𝜎0+ (∇ ⊗ ∇)𝑛0
𝑛0 , 𝐷(𝑁) = ∇𝑛0
𝑛0 ∇ ⊗ ∇n −
∇n ·∇𝑛0
𝑛0
∇𝑛0
𝑛0 .
Equation (6) for 𝑛0 is decoupled from (7). It corresponds to the quantum drift-diffusion or density-gradient model [1]. The spin density satisfies, at lowest order in 𝛼 and 𝜏, a drift-diffusion equation. In the general case 𝜀 > 0, equation (7) is a parabolic equation of fourth order with
−Δ2n being the highest-order derivative term. The (formal) proof of Theorem 2 is based on the semiclassical expansion of the quantum Maxwellian and the Lagrange multipliers 𝑎0and a.
Here, the assumption of small polarizations is crucial to be able to compute the expressions in a suitable way.
1.3. Comparison with models in the literature. The local model (6)–(7) includes other equa- tions in the literature as special cases. First, we claim that if 𝑛1and 𝑛2vanish, then 𝑛± =𝑛0± 𝜀𝑛3
solve, up to order 𝑂(𝜀2), the two-component spinorial quantum drift-diffusion equations (8) 𝜕𝑡𝑛± =𝜏div(∇𝑛±+ 𝑛±∇𝑉) − 𝜀2
6 𝜏div
𝑛±∇Δ√𝑛±
√𝑛±
− 4𝛼2𝜏(𝑛±− 𝑛∓).
Indeed, the third component of (7) equals in case 𝑛1 =𝑛2=0,
𝜕𝑡𝑛3=𝜏div(∇𝑛3+ 𝑛3∇𝑉) − 8𝛼2𝜏𝑛3+ 𝑂(𝜀2).
Adding this equation to or subtracting it from (6) gives
𝜕𝑡(𝑛0± 𝜀𝑛3) = 𝜏 div ∇(𝑛0± 𝜀𝑛3) + (𝑛0± 𝜀𝑛3)∇𝑉
− 𝜀2 6 div
𝑛0∇Δ√𝑛0
√𝑛0
− 8𝛼2𝜀𝜏𝑛3+ 𝑂(𝜀3).
Replacing 𝑛3= (𝑛+−𝑛−)/(2𝜀) and expanding√𝑛0 = √𝑛±p
1 ∓ 𝜀𝑛3/𝑛± = √𝑛±+𝑂(𝜀), then gives (8) up to order 𝑂(𝜀2). Equation (8) corresponds to the two-component drift-diffusion model for the spin-up and spin-down densities 𝑛+and 𝑛−, respectively, which was derived in [3, Theorem 2]
from the Wigner–BGK model. The expression 𝐽± = ∇𝑛± + 𝑛±∇𝑉 is the classical contribution of the spin-up/spin-down current density. The second term on the right-hand side of (8) can be interpreted as a quantum current including the Bohm potential Δ√𝑛±/√𝑛±. The equations are weakly coupled through the last term, which expresses the well-known D’yakonov–Perel’ spin relaxation. The spin drift-diffusion model with 𝜀 = 0 was suggested in [21] and mathematically analyzed in [12, 13]. Model (8) in one space dimension and with nonlinear diffusion corresponds to the bipolar quantum drift-diffusion equations that were analyzed in [5].
Second, we observe that equation (6) for 𝑛0is decoupled from (7) since it does not contain the spin density n. In fact, both equations are completely decoupled in the limit 𝜀 → 0. Indeed, in this limit, equations (6)–(7) become the spin-vector drift-diffusion model
𝜕𝑡𝑛0 =𝜏div(∇𝑛0+ 𝑛0∇𝑉), (9)
𝜕𝑡n = 𝜏div(∇n + n∇𝑉) − 2𝛼𝜏(2∇⊥× n + ∇⊥𝑉× n) − 4𝛼2𝜏(2n + n⊥⊥).
(10)
These equations correspond to the model of [2, Section 4.3] and to the semiclassical drift-diffusion equations derived in [10] in the case of constant relaxation time and purely spin-orbit interaction field. The charge density 𝑛0 satisfies the standard drift-diffusion equation for semiconductors.
Since
∇⊥× n = 𝜕𝑥1©
« 𝑛3
0
−𝑛1
ª®
¬+ 𝜕𝑥2©
« 0 𝑛3
−𝑛2
ª®
¬
=div ©
«
𝑛3 0 0 𝑛3
−𝑛1 −𝑛2
ª®
¬ ,
the spin current diffuses according to the classical drift-diffusion current and an additional current, coming from the spin-orbit interaction. The equation for n also contains the gate control term
−2𝛼𝜏∇⊥𝑉× n, which expresses the capability to control the spin by means of an applied voltage, and the relaxation term −4𝛼2𝜏(2n + n⊥⊥) = −4𝛼2𝜏(𝑛1, 𝑛2,2𝑛3)𝑇.
A related spin-vector model was derived in [20], leading to (9) and an equation similar to (10). The difference to the model of [20] is that there, quantum effects are taken into account but only up to first order. Indeed, it is assumed in [20] that 𝜀 and 𝜏 are of the same order such that second-order effects, like the quantum Bohm potential, cannot be seen in this approach.
Third, the nonlocal model (4)–(5) reduces in the spinless case to the following nonlocal equation for the charge density:
𝜕𝑡𝑛0=𝜏div(𝑛0∇(𝑎0+ 𝑉)), 𝑛0= hM(𝑁)i =
W
exp W−1
− |𝑝|2 2 +𝑎0
,
which was derived in [6] as the entropic quantum drift-diffusion model. An interesting feature of this model is that the macroscopic quantum free energy
𝐸 =−
∫
R2𝑛0(𝑎0+ 𝑉)𝑑𝑥 is a decreasing function of time:
𝑑𝐸 𝑑𝑡 =
∫
R2 𝜕𝑡𝑛0(𝑎0+ 𝑉) + 𝑛0𝜕𝑡(𝑎0+ 𝑉) 𝑑𝑥 =
∫
R2𝜕𝑡𝑛0(𝑎0+ 𝑉 + 1)𝑑𝑥
=−
∫
R2𝑛0|∇(𝑎0+ 𝑉)|2𝑑𝑥 ≤ 0.
Here, we have used the property that the derivative 𝜕𝑡𝑛0 equals 𝑛0𝜕𝑡𝑎0 (this is basically a consequence of [8, Lemma 3.3]).
Notation. We summarize some notation used in this paper. Bold face letters indicate vectors in R3like a = (𝑎1, 𝑎2, 𝑎3)𝑇 ∈ R3. We write h 𝑓 i =∫
R2 𝑓 𝑑𝑝and introduce the notation 𝑝⊥ =(𝑝2,−𝑝1,0)𝑇, n⊥⊥ =(−𝑛1,−𝑛2,0)𝑇, ∇⊥𝑥 = (𝜕𝑥2,−𝜕𝑥1,0)𝑇.
If clear from the context, we write ∇ instead of ∇𝑥. The partial derivative with respect to 𝑥𝑖or 𝑝𝑘 is denoted by 𝜕𝑥𝑖 or 𝜕𝑝𝑘, respectively, and 𝜕𝑥2𝑖𝑥𝑘 is a second-order partial derivative.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present some background material, in particular the von Neumann and Wigner equations, the Moyal product and its properties, and introduce the quantum Maxwellian M(𝑁) and the Wigner–BGK model (3). The nonlocal quantum model of Theorem 1 is derived in Section 3, while the semiclassical expansion leading to the local quantum model of Theorem 2 is performed in Section 4. The appendices collect some technical proofs, namely the formal solution of the quantum maximum entropy problem leading to the quantum Maxwellian and its semiclassical expansion.
2. Background material
In this section, we detail the scaling of the von Neumann equation, introduce the phase-space formulation, and define the Moyal product and the quantum Maxwellian.
2.1. Scaling. The confined electrons move in the plane 𝑥 = (𝑥1, 𝑥2,0)𝑇 with the momentum 𝑝 = (𝑝1, 𝑝2,0)𝑇. The electron spin, however, is a vector in R3 having generally nonvanishing components. An electron in the (𝑥1, 𝑥2)-plane with Rashba interaction is described by the Hamiltonian
H =
− ℏ2
2𝑚Δ+ 𝑞𝑉 (𝑥)
𝜎0− ℏ𝛼𝑅
0 i𝜕𝑥2 − 𝜕𝑥1
i𝜕𝑥2 + 𝜕𝑥1 0
,
where the parameters are the reduced Planck constant ℏ, the electron mass 𝑚, the elementary charge 𝑞, and the Rashba constant 𝛼𝑅 > 0. Furthermore, 𝑉 (𝑥) is the given electric potential and 𝜎0 ∈ C2×2is the identity matrix. The evolution of the electrons is governed by the von Neumann equation for the density operator ˆ𝜌(𝑡), which is a positive trace-class operator on 𝐿2(R2; C2),
iℏ𝜕𝑡ˆ𝜌 = [H, ˆ𝜌], 𝑡 > 0.
This equation can be written in dimensionless form by introducing the reference length 𝑥0(e.g.
the device diameter), time 𝑡0, and density 𝑁0. We choose the thermal momentum 𝑝0=√ 𝑚𝑘𝐵𝑇0 (where 𝑘𝐵is the Boltzmann constant and 𝑇0the background temperature), the reference potential 𝑉0= 𝑝20/(𝑚𝑞), and the energy time 𝑡𝐸 =𝑚𝑥0/𝑝0. The energy time corresponds to the time that a typical electron with energy 𝑘𝐵𝑇0 needs to cross the device. The time 𝑡0denotes another time scale and will be discussed in Section 2.4. Then, using the same notation for the unscaled and scaled variables, the scaled von Neumann equation becomes (1), the scaled Hamiltonian equals (2), and the scaled energy time, Planck constant, and Rashba constant are given by, respectively,
𝜏0= 𝑡𝐸
𝑡0, 𝜀 = ℏ
𝑥0𝑝0, 𝛼 = 𝑚𝑥0𝛼𝑅 ℏ .
2.2. Phase-space formulation. For the asymptotic analysis, it is convenient to work with phase- space functions instead of density operators. We use the Wigner transformation to transform a density operator into the phase-space-type Wigner function. Of course, due to Heisenberg’s un- certainty principle, it is impossible to have have a phase-space description in quantum mechanics.
The Wigner function is formally similar to a phase-space distribution, and the Wigner transforma- tion can be considered as a tool to simplify the calculations and to obtain a classical-like physical intuition behind the mathematical manipulations. For details, we refer to [14, 15].
The density operator ˆ𝜌 in (1) is a (time-dependent) Hilbert–Schmidt operator on the space 𝐿2(R2; C2) [19, Chap. 6]. It is uniquely determined by its kernel 𝜌 ∈ 𝐿2(R2 × R2; C2×2) satisfying
( ˆ𝜌𝜓)(𝑥) =
∫
R2
𝜌(𝑥, 𝑦)𝜓(𝑦)𝑑𝑦 for 𝜓 ∈ 𝐿2(R2; C2).
The Wigner transform W(𝜌) is a matrix-valued function of the phase-space variables (𝑥, 𝑝), defined by
(11) W ( ˆ𝜌)(𝑥, 𝑝) =
∫
R2
𝜌
𝑥+ 𝜂
2, 𝑥− 𝜂 2
𝑒−i𝜂·𝑝/𝜀𝑑𝜂.
Note that the integration domain is R2and not R3, since the electron system is confined in the two- dimensional plane with respect to 𝑥 and 𝑝. The Wigner transform defined for Hilbert–Schmidt operators can be extended to a wider class of distributional phase-space functions [11]. In such an extended setting, the Wigner transformation is the inverse of the Weyl quantization, which assigns to a phase-space function (or distribution) a quantum operator and which is defined for suitable Wigner functions 𝑊 by
W−1(𝑊)(𝑥, 𝑦) = 1 (2𝜋𝜀)2
∫
R2
𝑊
𝑥+ 𝑦 2 , 𝑝
𝑒i(𝑥−𝑦)·𝑝/𝜀𝑑𝑝.
In the literature, often the expression symbols is used for phase-space functions (or distributions) associated to operators via Wigner–Weyl transforms, while the expression Wigner function is reserved to those symbols that are the Wigner transforms of density operators.
Let 𝑊 = W(𝜌) be a symbol associated to a density operator (i.e. a Wigner function). We can express 𝑊 in the terms of the Pauli basis,
𝑊(𝑥, 𝑝) = Õ3
𝑗 =0
𝑤𝑗(𝑥, 𝑝)𝜎𝑗 =: 𝑤0(𝑥, 𝑝)𝜎0+ w(𝑥, 𝑝) · σ,
where the Pauli matrices 𝜎0 =
1 0 0 1
, 𝜎1=
0 1 1 0
, 𝜎2=
0 −i i 0
, 𝜎3 =
1 0 0 −1
are a basis of Hermitian matrices of C2×2. For instance, the Wigner transform of the Hamiltonian (2) equals
(12) 𝐻𝜀 =W (H𝜀)(𝑥, 𝑝) = 𝜂0𝜎0+ η · σ,
where 𝜂0(𝑥, 𝑝) := 12|𝑝|2+ 𝑉 (𝑥), η(𝑥, 𝑝) := 𝛼𝑝⊥, and 𝑝⊥ := 𝑝 × e3 =(𝑝2,−𝑝1,0)𝑇, e3= (0, 0, 1)𝑇.
The Pauli algebra is quite convenient for mathematical manipulations. For instance, we note the following rule. Let 𝐴 = 𝑎0𝜎0+ a · σ and 𝐵 = 𝑏0𝜎0+ b · σ be two matrices in C2×2. Then (13) 𝐴𝐵 = (𝑎0𝑏0+ a · b)𝜎0+ (𝑎0b+ 𝑏0a+ ia × b) · σ, tr(𝐴𝐵) = 2(𝑎0𝑏0+ a · b).
2.3. Moyal product. The Moyal product appears when transforming the von Neumann equation (1) to the Wigner equation. In fact, the concatenation of operators translates into the Moyal product of the Wigner transforms. We refer to [11] for proofs of the results mentioned in this section. For two symbols 𝑓 , 𝑔 ∈ 𝐿2(R2× R2; C), the Moyal product is defined as the generalized convolution
( 𝑓 #𝑔)(𝑥, 𝑝) = 1 (𝜋𝜀)4
∫
R2
∫
R2
∫
R2
∫
R2 𝑓(𝑥1, 𝑝1)𝑔(𝑥2, 𝑝2) (14)
× exp
2i
𝜀 (𝑥 − 𝑥2) · 𝑝1+ (𝑥1− 𝑥) · 𝑝2− (𝑥1− 𝑥2) · 𝑝
𝑑𝑥1𝑑𝑝1𝑑𝑥2𝑑𝑝2. Lemma 3. Let ˆ𝜌1, ˆ𝜌2be two density operators on 𝐿2(R2; C2). Then
W ( ˆ𝜌1ˆ𝜌2) = W ( ˆ𝜌1)#W ( ˆ𝜌2).
Furthermore, if 𝑓 , 𝑔 are two symbols with values in C then (15)
∫
R2
∫
R2( 𝑓 #𝑔)(𝑥, 𝑝)𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑝 =
∫
R2
∫
R2
𝑓(𝑥, 𝑝)𝑔(𝑥, 𝑝)𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑝.
The lemma is formally proved by straightforward calculations using the Weyl quantization.
For the next result, we need a multi-index notation. Let 𝜇 = (𝜇1, 𝜇2) ∈ N20be a multiindex with order |𝜇| = 𝜇1+𝜇2and factorial 𝜇! = 𝜇1!𝜇2! and let the partial derivative 𝜕𝑥𝜇be an abbreviation for
𝜕|𝜇|/(𝜕𝑥𝜇11𝜕𝑥𝜇22) and similarly for 𝜕𝑝𝜇. The Moyal product has the following semiclassical expansion.
Lemma 4. Let 𝑓 , 𝑔 be two symbols. Then ( 𝑓 #𝑔)(𝑥, 𝑝) =
Õ∞ 𝑗 =0
𝜀𝑗( 𝑓 #𝑗𝑔)(𝑥, 𝑝), where
( 𝑓 #𝑗ℎ)(𝑥, 𝑝) = 1 (2i)𝑗
Õ
|𝜇|+|𝜈|= 𝑗
(−1)|𝜇|
𝜇!𝜈! 𝜕𝑥𝜇𝜕𝑝𝜈𝑓(𝑥, 𝑝)𝜕𝑝𝜇𝜕𝑥𝜈𝑔(𝑥, 𝑝).
The first two terms in the sum are the normal multiplication and the Poisson bracket, respec- tively:
(16) 𝑓#0𝑔 = 𝑓 𝑔, 𝑓#1𝑔 = 1
2i (∇𝑝𝑓 · ∇𝑥𝑔− ∇𝑥𝑓 · ∇𝑝𝑔).
If 𝐴 = (𝐴𝑖 𝑗), 𝐵 = (𝐵𝑖 𝑗) are two matrix-valued symbols with values in C2×2, we define its Moyal product as (𝐴#𝐵)𝑖 𝑗 = Í2𝑘=1𝐴𝑖𝑘#𝐵𝑘 𝑗. Formulating 𝐴 = 𝑎0𝜎0+ a · σ and 𝐵 = 𝑏0𝜎0+ b · σ in the Pauli components, the matrix Moyal product can be written in the Pauli basis as
(17) 𝐴#𝐵 = (𝑎0#𝑏0+ a ·#b)𝜎0+ (𝑎0#b + a#𝑏0+ ia ×#b) · σ,
where “·#” and “×#” are the inner and cross products on R3, respectively, where the multiplication is replaced by the Moyal product.
Given two symbols 𝑓 and 𝑔, we define the odd and even Moyal product by
(18) 𝑓#odd𝑔 = 1
2 (𝑓#𝑔 − 𝑔# 𝑓 ), 𝑓#even𝑔 = 1
2 (𝑓#𝑔 + 𝑔# 𝑓 ).
Let 𝑉 = 𝑉 (𝑥) and 𝑓 = 𝑓 (𝑥, 𝑝) be two symbols. We define the potential operator (𝜃𝜀[𝑉] 𝑓 )(𝑥, 𝑝) = 1
(2𝜀)2
∫
R2
∫
R2𝛿𝜀[𝑉](𝑥, 𝜂) 𝑓 (𝑥, 𝑝′)𝑒−i(𝑝−𝑝′)·𝜂𝑑𝜂𝑑𝑝′, where 𝛿𝜀[𝑉] = 1
i𝜀
𝑉
𝑥+ 𝜀
2𝜂
− 𝑉
𝑥− 𝜀
2𝜂
. Lemma 5. Let 𝑉 = 𝑉(𝑥) and 𝑓 = 𝑓 (𝑥, 𝑝) be two symbols. Then
i𝜀𝜃𝜀[𝑉] 𝑓 = 2𝑉#even𝑓 , (19)
h𝜃𝜀[𝑉]( 𝑓 )i = 0, h𝑝𝜃𝜀[𝑉]( 𝑓 )i = −∇𝑥𝑉( 𝑓 ).
(20)
Proof. Using the definition of the Moyal product, it follows after suitable substitutions that 2(𝑉#even𝑓)(𝑥, 𝑝) = (𝑉# 𝑓 − 𝑓 #𝑉)(𝑥, 𝑝)
= 1
(2𝜋)2
∫
R2
∫
R2
𝑉
𝑥+ 𝜀
2𝜂
− 𝑉
𝑥− 𝜀
2𝜂
𝑓(𝑥, 𝑝′)𝑒i𝜂·(𝑝′−𝑝)𝑑𝜂𝑑𝑝′
=i𝜀(𝜃𝜀[𝑉] 𝑓 )(𝑥, 𝑝).
A formal proof of (20) can be found in [14, Lemma 12.9].
By Lemma 4, the operator 𝜃𝜀[𝑉] can be expanded as
𝜃𝜀[𝑉] 𝑓 = ∇𝑥𝑉 · ∇𝑝𝑓 + 𝑂(𝜀2),
which shows that it reduces in the limit 𝜀 → 0 to the classical drift term appearing in kinetic theory.
Let ˆ𝜌 be a density operator on 𝐿2(R2; C2) with Wigner function 𝑊 = W ( ˆ𝜌). Then Tr( ˆ𝜌) = 1
(2𝜋𝜀)2 tr
∫
R2
∫
R2𝑊(𝑥, 𝑝)𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑝,
where “Tr” is the operator trace and “tr” the matrix trace. Furthermore, let ˆ𝜌1 and ˆ𝜌2 be two density operators and let 𝑊1 =W ( ˆ𝜌1), 𝑊2=W ( ˆ𝜌2) be the associated Wigner functions. Then it follows from (15) and W( ˆ𝜌1ˆ𝜌2) = 𝑊1#𝑊2that
(21) Tr( ˆ𝜌1ˆ𝜌2) = 1 (2𝜋𝜀)2 tr
∫
R2
∫
R2𝑊1(𝑥, 𝑝)𝑊2(𝑥, 𝑝)𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑝.
The Moyal product allows us to formulate the von Neumann equation in the phase-space setting.
Lemma 6. Let ˆ𝜌 be a solution to the von Neumann equation (1) and 𝑊 = W( ˆ𝜌) be its Wigner function. Then 𝑊 solves
𝜏0𝜕𝑡𝑊 + T 𝑊 = 0, 𝑡 >0,
where T 𝑊 := (i/𝜀)[𝐻𝜀, 𝑊]# = (i/𝜀)(𝐻𝜀#𝑊 − 𝑊#𝐻𝜀). Furthermore, the Pauli components of 𝑊 = 𝑤0𝜎0+ w · σ solve
𝜏0𝜕𝑡𝑤0+ 𝑝 · ∇𝑥𝑤0+ 𝛼𝜀∇⊥𝑥 · w − 𝜃𝜀[𝑉]𝑤0 =0, (22)
𝜏0𝜕𝑡w+ 𝑝 · ∇𝑥w+ 𝛼𝜀∇𝑥⊥𝑤0− 𝜃𝜀[𝑉]w − 2𝛼𝑝⊥× w = 0, 𝑡 >0, (23)
recalling that∇⊥𝑥 = (𝜕𝑥2,−𝜕𝑥1,0)𝑇 and 𝑝⊥ =(𝑝2,−𝑝1,0)𝑇. The lemma shows that the transport operator can be written as
T 𝑊 = 𝑝 · ∇𝑥 + 𝛼𝜀∇⊥𝑥 · w − 𝜃𝜀[𝑉]𝑤0 𝜎0 (24)
+ 𝑝 · ∇𝑥w+ 𝛼𝜀∇⊥𝑥𝑤0− 𝜃𝜀[𝑉]w − 2𝛼𝑝⊥× w
· σ.
Proof of Lemma 6. Applying the Wigner transform to (1),
(25) i𝜀𝜏0𝜕𝑡𝑊 =W (i𝜀𝜏0𝜕𝑡ˆ𝜌) = W(H𝜀ˆ𝜌) − W( ˆ𝜌H𝜀) = 𝐻𝜀#𝑊 − 𝑊#𝐻𝜀, where 𝐻𝜀 is given by (12). Then (17), (18), and an elementary computation show that
𝐻𝜀#𝑊 − 𝑊#𝐻𝜀 =2 𝜂0#odd𝑤0+ η ·#oddw
𝜎0+ 2 𝜂0#oddw+ η#odd𝑤0+ iη ×#even w
· σ, where 𝜂0 and η are defined in (12). Comparing the Pauli components of the left-hand side of (25), written as i𝜀𝜏𝜕𝑡(𝑤0𝜎0+ w · σ), with those from the right-hand side, we find that
i𝜀𝜏0𝜕𝑡𝑤0=𝜂0#odd𝑤0+ η ·#oddw,
i𝜀𝜏0𝜕𝑡w = 𝜂0#oddw+ η#odd𝑤0+ iη ×#even w.
It remains to evaluate the right-hand sides. It follows from (19) that 2𝑉#odd𝑤0 = i𝜀𝜃𝜀[𝑉]𝑤0. Furthermore, since the derivatives of |𝑝|2/2 of order higher than two vanish, the Moyal product
|𝑝|2#odd𝑤0reduces to |𝑝|2#1𝑤0=−i𝜀𝑝 · ∇𝑥𝑤0(see (16)). Hence, 𝜂0#𝑤0 =i𝜀(𝜃𝜀[𝑉]𝑤0− 𝑝 · ∇𝑥𝑤0).
The higher-order derivatives of η vanish too such that 2η ·#oddw =−i𝛼𝜀
Õ2 𝑗 =1
∇𝑝𝜂𝑗 · ∇𝑥𝑤𝑗 =−i𝛼𝜀(𝜕𝑥2𝑤1− 𝜕𝑥1𝑤2) = −i𝛼𝜀∇⊥𝑥 · w.
Collecting the last two displayed expressions, we obtain (22).
Similarly as above, we have
2𝜂0#w = i𝜀(𝜃[𝑉]w − 𝑝 · ∇𝑥w), 2η ·#odd 𝑤0 =−i𝛼𝜀∇⊥𝑥𝑤0, where 𝑝 · ∇𝑥w =Í2
𝑗 =1𝑝𝑗𝜕𝑥𝑗w. Again, since the higher-order derivatives of η vanish, only the lowest-order term of the even Moyal cross product η ×#evenwremains:
iη ×#evenw =iη ×#0w =iη × w = i𝛼𝑝⊥× w.
We deduce (23) from the last three displayed expressions, finishing the proof. 2.4. Quantum Maxwellian and Wigner–Boltzmann equation. The local equilibrium state of the electron gas is assumed to be the minimizer of the quantum entropy functional (if it exists) under the constraints of given macroscopic densities [8]. The quantum maximum entropy problem means that the collisions drive the system towards the most probable state compatible with the observed densities. The entropy functional is the quantum free energy
G( ˆ𝜌) = Tr( ˆ𝜌 log ˆ𝜌 − ˆ𝜌 + H𝜀ˆ𝜌),
where Tr is the operator trace, log is the operator logarithm, and H𝜀is the Hamiltonian (2). Note that the operator logarithm is well defined for positive definite density operators. To formulate the entropy functional in the phase space, we introduce the quantum exponential and quantum logarithm according to [7] by
Exp(𝑊) := W (exp W−1(𝑊)), Log(𝑊) := W (log W−1(𝑊)), where exp is the exponential operator. We deduce from identity (21) that
(26) E(𝑊) := G( ˆ𝜌) = 1 (2𝜋𝜀2tr
∫
R2
∫
R2(𝑊Log𝑊 − 𝑊 + 𝐻𝜀𝑊)𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑝, where 𝐻𝜀 is defined in (12) and 𝑊 = W( ˆ𝜌).
Definition 1(Quantum maximum entropy problem). Given the numbers 𝑛0andn = (𝑛1, 𝑛2, 𝑛3)𝑇 ∈ R3 satisfying 𝜀|n| < 𝑛0, we wish to find the Wigner function 𝑊∗ such that E(𝑊∗) is minimal among all symbols 𝑊 = 𝑤0𝜎0+ w · σ such that W−1(𝑊) is positive definite and
h𝑤0i = 𝑛0, hwi = 𝜀n.
Observe that we introduced a smallness condition on the spin components. We suppose that the spin vector is of the order of the scaled Planck constant. This condition simplifies the semiclassical expansion, and it implies that the density matrix 𝑁 := h𝑊i = 𝑛0𝜎0+ 𝜀n · σ is positive definite. The positive definiteness condition on W−1(𝑊) guarantees that the quantum logarithm is well defined.
Theorem 7. If the quantum maximum entropy problem has a solutionM(𝑁) = M0𝜎0+ M · σ, then it is necessarily of the form
(M(𝑁))(𝑥, 𝑝) = Exp − 𝐻𝜀(𝑥, 𝑝) + ˜𝑎0(𝑥)𝜎0+ 𝜀a(𝑥) · σ , where ˜𝑎0anda are real Lagrange multipliers. The solution satisfies the constraints
𝑛0 = 1
2 htr(M(𝑁)𝜎0)i = hM0i, 𝜀𝑛𝑗 = 1
2 htr(M(𝑁)𝜎𝑗)i, 𝑗 =1, 2, 3.
We call M = M(𝑁) the quantum Maxwellian. It extends slightly the notion of the quantum Maxwellian introduced in [8]. The proof of the existence of the quantum Maxwellian is a very difficult task, even in the one-dimensional case [9, 16]. Regularity properties of M are proved in [17]. The proof of Theorem 7 is deferred to Appendix A.
We define the Hermitian matrix of Lagrange multipliers by ˜𝐴(𝑥) = ˜𝑎0𝜎0+ 𝜀 ˜a · σ. Then (see (12))
(27) − 𝐻𝜀+ ˜𝐴 = ℎ0𝜎0+ 𝜀h1· σ, ℎ0 =−12|𝑝|2+ 𝑎0, 𝑎0= ˜𝑎0− 𝑉, h1=a− 𝛼𝑝⊥.
The definition of the quantum Maxwellian allows us to introduce the relaxation-time (BGK- type) collision operator 𝑄(𝑊) = 𝜏−1(M(𝑁) − 𝑊) into the transport model, where 𝜏 > 0 is a scaled relaxation time, leading to
𝜏0𝜕𝑡𝑊+ T 𝑊 = 𝑄(𝑊),
where the scaled time 𝜏0 is introduced in Section 2.1 and we recall the definition T𝑊 = (i/𝜀)(𝐻𝜀#𝑊 − 𝑊#𝐻𝜀) (see Lemma 6). The collision operator conserves the particle number and spin since, by definition of the quantum Maxwellian, h𝑄(𝑊)i = 0.
We assume that 𝜏0is of order one and 𝜏 is small compared to one. Physically this means that the time scale of the system is the energy time 𝑡𝐸 = 𝑚𝑥0/𝑝0 and the relaxation time is small compared to 𝑡𝐸. This leads to the Wigner–Boltzmann equation in the hydrodynamic scaling (28) 𝜏𝜕𝑡𝑊 + 𝜏T 𝑊 = M(𝑁) − 𝑊, 𝑡 >0, where 𝑁 = h𝑊i.
The existence of solutions to the von Neumann–BGK equation associated to (28) with values in the Schatten space of order one is proved in [17].
We already mentioned in the introduction that we cannot use a classical diffusion scaling (i.e. 𝜏0and 𝜏 are of the same order and small) since the moment hT M(𝑁)i generally does not vanish. The following proposition makes this statement more precise. We recall the notation [𝐴, 𝐵]#= 𝐴#𝐵 − 𝐵#𝐴 for two symbols 𝐴 and 𝐵.
Lemma 8. Let 𝑊 be a solution to (28) and ˜𝐴 be the Lagrange multiplier matrix related to the Maxwellian byM(𝑁) = Exp(−𝐻𝜀 + ˜𝐴). Then hT M(𝑁)i = 0 if and only if h[ ˜𝐴,M(𝑁)]#i = 0.
In particular,hT M(𝑁)i = 0 if and only if ˜𝐴 commutes with 𝑁.
Proof. We know from Lemma 6 that i𝜀T𝑊 = −[𝐻𝜀, 𝑊]#. Moreover, since every operator commutes with its exponential, we have (−𝐻𝜀+ ˜𝐴)#M(𝑁) = M(𝑁)#(−𝐻𝜀+ ˜𝐴) = 0. This gives (29) − i𝜀T M(𝑁) = [𝐻𝜀,M(𝑁)]# =−[−𝐻𝜀 + ˜𝐴, M(𝑁)]#+ [ ˜𝐴, M(𝑁)]# =[ ˜𝐴,M(𝑁)]#, showing the first statement. By identity (15), h[𝐴, 𝐵]#i = h𝐴#𝐵i − h𝐵#𝐴i = h𝐴𝐵i − h𝐵𝐴i = h[𝐴, 𝐵]i for any symbols 𝐴 and 𝐵. Therefore, since ˜𝐴 only depends on 𝑥,
−i𝜀hT M(𝑁)i = h[ ˜𝐴, M(𝑁)]#i = h[ ˜𝐴, M(𝑁)]i = [ ˜𝐴,hM(𝑁)i] = [ ˜𝐴, 𝑁].
This proves the second statement.
3. Derivation of the nonlocal quantum model
We insert the function 𝐺 := −𝜏−1(M(𝑁) − 𝑊) into the Wigner–Boltzmann equation (28) and use the property 𝑊 = M(𝑁) + 𝑂(𝜏):
𝐺 =−𝜕𝑡𝑊− T 𝑊 = −𝜕𝑡M(𝑁) − T M(𝑁) + 𝑂(𝜏).
After integrating (28) with respect to 𝑝 and taking into account that h𝑊i = 𝑁 and hM(𝑁)−𝑊i = 0, we find that
𝜕𝑡𝑁 =−hT 𝑊i = −hT M(𝑁)i − 𝜏hT 𝐺i
=−hT M(𝑁)i + 𝜏hT 𝜕𝑡M(𝑁)i + 𝜏hT T M(𝑁)i + 𝑂(𝜏2).
We wish to compute the terms on the right-hand side. To simplify the notation, we set M := M(𝑁). The proof of Lemma 8 shows that i𝜀hT Mi = −[ ˜𝐴, 𝑁]. Inserting the Pauli decompositions ˜𝐴 = ˜𝑎0𝜎0+ 𝜀a · σ and 𝑁 = 𝑛0𝜎0+ 𝜀n · σ and using (13), a computation leads to
(30) hT Mi = 2𝜀(n × a) · σ.
To calculate hT T Mi, we use (29), the decomposition M = M0𝜎0+ M · σ, rule (17), and property (19):
T M = 1
i𝜀 (M# ˜𝐴− ˜𝐴#M) = 2
i𝜀 M#odd𝐴˜
= 2 i𝜀
M0#odd˜𝑎0+ 𝜀 Õ3
𝑗 =1
M𝑗#odd𝑎𝑗
𝜎0+ 2 i𝜀
𝜀M0#odda+ M#odd˜𝑎0+ i𝜀M ×#evena
· σ
=−
𝜃𝜀[ ˜𝑎0](M0) + 𝜀 Õ3
𝑗 =1
𝜃𝜀[𝑎𝑗](M𝑗)
𝜎0
−
𝜀𝜃𝜀[a](M0) + 𝜃𝜀[ ˜𝑎0](M) − 2M ×#evena
(31) · 𝜎.
Furthermore, we replace 𝑊 in (24) by T M, giving
T T M = 𝑝 · ∇𝑥(T M)0+ 𝛼𝜀∇⊥𝑥 · T M − 𝜃𝜀[𝑉](T M)0 𝜎0
+ 𝑝 · ∇𝑥T M + 𝛼𝜀∇⊥𝑥 (T M)0− 2𝛼𝑝⊥× T M − 𝜃𝜀[𝑉]T M
· σ.
Next, we integrate this expression with respect to 𝑝. The 𝜎0-component becomes, using the decomposition (31),
h(T T M)0i = −
∫
R2
𝑝· ∇𝑥
𝜃𝜀[ ˜𝑎0](M0) + 𝜀 Õ3
𝑗 =1
𝜃𝜀[𝑎𝑗](M𝑗)
𝑑𝑝
− 𝛼𝜀
∫
R2∇𝑥⊥· 𝜀𝜃𝜀[a](M0) + 𝜃𝜀[ ˜𝑎0](M) − 2M ×#even a 𝑑𝑝
+
∫
R2
𝜃𝜀[𝑉]
𝜃𝜀[ ˜𝑎0](M0) + 𝜀 Õ3
𝑗 =1
𝜃𝜀[𝑎𝑗](M𝑗)
𝑑𝑝.
In view of (15), (20), and hM𝑗i = 𝜀𝑛𝑗, the first integral equals div𝑥(𝑛0∇𝑥˜𝑎0+ 𝜀2n· ∇𝑥a), while the second integral becomes 2𝛼𝜀2∇⊥𝑥 · (n × a), and the third integral vanishes. Recalling that
˜𝑎0=𝑎0+ 𝑉, we infer that
(32) h(T T M)0i = div𝑥 𝑛0∇𝑥𝑎0+ 𝑛0∇𝑥𝑉 + 𝜀2n· ∇𝑥a
+ 2𝛼𝜀2∇⊥𝑥 · (n × a).
In a similar way, we compute the σ-component of hT T Mi:
hT T Mi = −
∫
R2
𝑝· ∇𝑥 𝜀𝜃𝜀[a](M0) + 𝜃𝜀[ ˜𝑎0](M) − 2M ×#evena (33) 𝑑𝑝
− 𝛼𝜀
∫
R2∇⊥𝑥
𝜃𝜀[ ˜𝑎0](M0) + 𝜀 Õ3
𝑗 =1
𝜃𝜀[𝑎𝑗](M𝑗)
𝑑𝑝
+ 2𝛼
∫
R2
𝑝⊥ × 𝜀𝜃𝜀[a](M0) + 𝜃𝜀[ ˜𝑎0](M) − 2M ×#even a 𝑑𝑝 +
∫
R2
𝜃𝜀[𝑉] 𝜀𝜃𝜀[a](M0) + 𝜃𝜀[ ˜𝑎0](M) + 2M ×#even a 𝑑𝑝
=𝜀div𝑥 𝑛0∇𝑥a+ n∇𝑥𝑎0+ n∇𝑥𝑉
+ 2∇𝑥 · (J𝑇 × a)
− 2𝛼𝜀 𝑛0∇𝑥⊥× a + ∇⊥𝑥(𝑎0+ 𝑉) × n
+ 4𝛼 ah𝑝⊥· Mi + J𝑇a⊥ , where J𝑘𝑇 = h𝑝𝑘Mi.
We turn now to the last term hT 𝜕𝑡Mi. Identity (30) shows that
(34) hT 𝜕𝑡Mi = 𝜕𝑡hT Mi = 2𝜀(𝜕𝑡n× a + n × 𝜕𝑡a) · σ.
It remains to compute 𝜕𝑡nand 𝜕𝑡a. By (30) again,
𝜕𝑡𝑛0𝜎0+ 𝜀𝜕𝑡n· σ = 𝜕𝑡𝑁 =−hT Mi + 𝑂(𝜏) = −2𝜀(n × a) · σ + 𝑂(𝜏), and thus 𝜕𝑡0𝑛0=0 and 𝜕𝑡0n = −2n × a at first order in 𝜏. We can write
𝜕𝑡0a = Õ3
𝑖=0
𝛿a
𝛿𝑛𝑖𝜕𝑡0𝑛𝑖 =−2 Õ3
𝑖=1
𝛿a
𝛿𝑛𝑖(n × a)𝑖,
where 𝛿a/𝛿𝑛𝑖 denotes the variational derivative of a. Collecting expressions (30)–(34) finishes the proof of Theorem 1.
4. Derivation of the semiclassical quantum model First, we expand M(𝑁) in terms of 𝜀.
Proposition 9. LetM(𝑁) be the quantum Maxwellian defined in Theorem 7. Then M(𝑁) = exp(ℎ0)𝜎0+ 𝜀 exp(ℎ0)h1· σ
+ 𝜀2
8 exp(ℎ0)
Δ𝑎0+ 1
3 |∇𝑎0|2− 𝑝𝑇(∇ ⊗ ∇𝑎0) 𝑝
+ 4|h1|2
𝜎0 + 𝜀3
24exp(ℎ0)
3Δ𝑎0+ |∇𝑎0|2− 𝑝𝑇(∇ ⊗ ∇𝑎0) 𝑝 + 4|h1|2 h1
+ 3Δa − 12𝛼∇⊥× a + 2∇a · ∇𝑎0− 𝑝𝑇(∇ ⊗ ∇a) 𝑝 + 2𝛼∇⊥(∇𝑎0· 𝑝) + 4 (∇a) 𝑝 − 𝛼∇⊥𝑎0
× h1
· σ + 𝑂(𝜀4), recalling that ℎ0=−12|𝑝|2+ 𝑎0, 𝑎0= ˜𝑎 − 𝑉, and h1 =a− 𝛼𝑝⊥.
We need an expansion up to order 𝜀3since the nonlocal model in Theorem 1 contains a term of order 𝜀−1.
Proof. We introduce the function
𝑔(𝛽) = Exp 𝛽(ℎ0𝜎0+ 𝜀h1· σ)
, 𝛽 ≥ 0.
We see from (27) that the quantum Maxwellian corresponds to M(𝑁) = 𝑔(1). The variable 𝛽 can be interpreted as the inverse temperature, and 𝛽 = 1 means that the temperature of the systems equals the thermal temperature. Lemma 3 implies that
𝜕𝛽𝑔(𝛽) = 𝜕𝛽
W
exp 𝛽(−H𝜀+ ˜𝐴) =W
(−H𝜀 + ˜𝐴) exp(−H𝜀 + ˜𝐴) (35)
=W (−H𝜀+ ˜𝐴)#W
exp 𝛽(−H𝜀 + ˜𝐴) =(−𝐻𝜀+ ˜𝐴)#𝑔(𝛽) for 𝛽 > 0 and 𝑔(0) = 𝜎0. Introducing the semiclassical expansions 𝑔(𝛽) = Í∞
𝑘=0𝜀𝑘𝑔(𝑘)(𝛽) on the left-hand side, inserting the semiclassical expansion of the Moyal product on the right-hand side (Lemma 5), and identifying the corresponding order of 𝜀, we obtain a system of recursive ordinary differential equations for 𝑔(𝑘),
(36) 𝜕𝛽𝑔(𝑘)(𝛽) = Õ𝑘
ℓ=0
ℎ0𝜎0#ℓ𝑔(𝑘−ℓ)(𝛽) +
𝑘−1
Õ
ℓ=0
(h1· σ)#ℓ𝑔(𝑘−ℓ−1)(𝛽), 𝑘 ≥ 0,
with the initial conditions 𝑔(0)(0) = 𝜎0and 𝑔(𝑘)(0) = 0 for 𝑘 ≥ 1. Recalling that the zeroth-order Moyal product is just the ordinary matrix multiplication, we find for 𝑘 = 0 that
𝜕𝛽𝑔(0)(𝛽) = ℎ0𝑔(0)(𝛽), 𝛽 > 0, 𝑔(0)(0) = 𝜎0,
with the solution 𝑔(0)(𝛽) = exp(𝛽ℎ0)𝜎0. (Note that this solution differs from the corresponding one in Appendix A since there, the function h1 contains an additional term of order one.) For
