format: text

text:
# Dephasing of Electrons in Mesoscopic Metal Wires

## I Motivations

The time $`\tau _\varphi `$ during which the quantum coherence of an electron is maintained is of fundamental importance in mesoscopic physics. The observability of many phenomena specific to this field relies on a long enough phase coherence time.meso  Amongst these are the weak localization correction to the conductance (WL), the universal conductance fluctuations (UCF), the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect, persistent currents in rings, the proximity effect near the interface between a superconductor and a normal metal, and others. Hence it is crucial to find out what mechanisms limit the quantum coherence of electrons.

In metallic thin films, at low temperature, electrons experience mostly elastic collisions from sample boundaries, defects of the ion lattice and static impurities in the metal. These collisions do not destroy the quantum coherence of electrons. Instead they can be pictured as resulting from a static potential on which the diffusive-like electronic quantum states are built.

What limits the quantum coherence of electrons are inelastic collisions. These are collisions with other electrons through the screened Coulomb interaction, with phonons, and also with extrinsic sources such as magnetic impurities or two level systems in the metal. Whereas above about 1 K electron-phonon interactions are known to be the dominant source of decoherence,phonons  electron-electron interactions are expected to be the leading inelastic process at lower temperatures in samples without extrinsic sources of decoherence.AAK

The theory of electron-electron interactions in the diffusive regime was worked out in the early 1980’s (for a review see AA ). It predicts a power law divergence of $`\tau _\varphi `$ when the temperature $`T`$ goes to zero. Effects of quantum interference are therefore expected to grow significantly upon cooling down the electrons. In mesoscopic wires, the predicted power law $`\tau _\varphi T^{2/3}`$ was first observed in 1986 by Wind *et al.*Wind  between 2 K and 5 K in aluminum and silver wires and then by Echternach *et al.*Echternach  down to 100 mK in a gold wire. However, in 1997, Mohanty, Jariwala, and WebbMJW  published a series of measurements of $`\tau _\varphi `$ on gold wires with a broad range of diffusion coefficients. They observed that the phase coherence time tends to saturate at low temperature, typically below 0.5 K, in apparent contradiction with theoretical predictions. That same year, measurements of the energy exchange rate between electrons in copper wiresPRLrelax  were found to be at odds, both qualitatively and quantitatively, with the prediction for electron-electron interactions. Both experiments suggested that electrons in mesoscopic metallic wires interact with each other differently and more strongly than predicted by theory.

To shed some light on this issue we present here several sets of experiments probing the phase coherence time at low temperature in mesoscopic metal wires.names  We summarize our most important conclusions here. First, we measured $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ down to 40 mK in several wires made of copper, silver, and gold and fabricated from source materials of various purities. We found in the four very pure silver wires and in the very pure gold wire that $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ does not saturate in the investigated temperature range, but continues to increase as the temperature is lowered in agreement with the theoretical prediction. Since these samples have comparable resistances and geometries as some measured in MJW , this observation casts doubt on the assertion MJW  that saturation of $`\tau _\varphi `$ is a universal feature of weakly-disordered metals. Second, we tested the impact of very dilute magnetic impurities with a small Kondo temperature on the temperature dependence of $`\tau _\varphi `$. We found that even at concentrations lower than one part per million (1 ppm), such impurities can cause $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ to display a plateau over a large temperature range. This could explain why saturation of $`\tau _\varphi `$ at low temperature is frequently observed. Finally, we probed the magnetic field dependence of the phase coherence time by measuring the magnetoresistance of copper Aharonov-Bohm rings showing a temperature-independent $`\tau _\varphi `$ at low temperature. The amplitude of the Aharonov-Bohm conductance oscillations increased strongly on a field scale proportional to the temperature, indicating that the phase coherence time at zero field was limited by spin-flip scattering from magnetic impurities.

## II Experimental techniques

### II.1 Sample fabrication

Figure 1 displays the photograph of a typical sample together with a schematic of the measurement setup.

All samples were fabricated using standard e-beam lithography techniques. A bilayer resist, consisting of a copolymer P(MMA/MAA) bottom layer and a PMMA top layer, was first spun onto an oxidized Si substrate wafer. This bilayer was then patterned by e-beam lithography to tailor a mask. The metal — gold, copper or silver — was deposited directly through this mask in evaporators used only for non-magnetic metals.adhesion

Samples made at Saclay used a Si substrate thermally oxidized over 500 nm, and metal evaporation was performed in an electron gun evaporator. The silver source material was placed inside a carbon liner, whereas copper and gold were put directly in the buckets of the e-gun system. Metal evaporation took place at a base pressure of about $`10^6`$ mbar with an evaporation rate of 0.2, 0.5 and 1 nm/s for silver, gold and copper respectively (seePierrePHD ).

Samples made at Michigan State University (MSU) were evaporated on a Si substrate with only the native oxide in a thermal evaporator used only for silver, aluminum, gold, copper and titanium. The source material and boat were replaced before each evaporation and manipulated using plastic tweezers. The pressure during evaporation was about $`10^6`$ mbar and the evaporation rate ranged between 0.2 and 0.5 nm/s.NoteEVAP

We measured the low field magnetoresistance of copper, gold and silver wires fabricated using source materials of purity 99.999% (5N) and 99.9999% (6N). Electrical and geometrical characteristics of the samples are summarized in Table 1.

### II.2 Experimental setup

The samples were immersed in the mixing chamber of a top loading dilution refrigerator. Electrical lines to the sample were filtered by commercial “pi” filters at the top of the cryostat and by discrete RC filters in the mixing chamber. Resistance measurements were performed using a standard ac four-terminal technique with a room temperature pre-amplifier of input voltage noise 1.5 nV/$`\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}`$ and a lock-in amplifier operated at frequencies between 100 and 300 Hz (see Fig. 1). To avoid significant heating of electrons we used ac voltages $`V_{ac}`$ across the samples such that $`eV_{ac}k_BT`$. This is particularly important at temperatures below 100 mK for which the length scale for electron-phonon interactions, responsible for cooling down the electronic fluid, can be as large as several millimeters (see Appendix A). A bridge circuit with a ratio transformer on one arm was used to enhance the measurement sensitivity to small changes in sample resistance. A magnetic field was applied perpendicular to the plane of the sample using a superconducting coil.

## III Low field magnetoresistance measurements

The most accurate way to extract $`\tau _\varphi `$ at low magnetic field in metallic thin films is to measure the magnetoresistance and to fit it using weak localization theory.WLreview  Both the amplitude and width of the weak localization peak (dip when spin-orbit coupling is strong) in the resistance are sensitive to the phase coherence length.

Figure 2 displays the low field magnetoresistance of samples Ag(6N)c, Ag(5N)b, Au(6N) and Cu(6N)d at several temperatures. The positive magnetoresistance indicates that spin-orbit scattering is stronger than inelastic scattering ($`\tau _{so}<\tau _\varphi `$). Raw magnetoresistance measurements already reveal a qualitative difference between these samples: the dip in the magnetoresistance of samples Ag(6N)c and Au(6N) becomes deeper and narrower upon cooling down to base temperature whereas it stops changing at low temperature in samples Ag(5N)b and Cu(6N)d.

The magnetoresistance $`\mathrm{\Delta }RR(B)R(\mathrm{})`$ is fit with the quasi-1D expression for the weak localization correction

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R}{R}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2R}{R_\mathrm{K}L}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{L_\varphi ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3L_{so}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{w}{L_H^2}}\right)^2]^{1/2}`$ (1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{L_\varphi ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{w}{L_H^2}}\right)^2]^{1/2}\}`$
where $`R`$ is the resistance of a wire of length $`L`$ and width $`w`$, $`R_\mathrm{K}=h/e^2`$ is the resistance quantum, $`L_\varphi =\sqrt{D\tau _\varphi }`$ is the phase coherence length, $`D`$ is the diffusion coefficient of electrons, $`L_H=\sqrt{\mathrm{}/eB}`$ is the magnetic length, $`B`$ is the magnetic field applied perpendicularly to the sample plane, and $`L_{so}=\sqrt{D\tau _{so}}`$ is the spin-orbit length that characterizes the intensity of spin-orbit coupling. Expression (1) holds for metallic wires in the diffusive regime, far from the metal-insulator transition, and in the quasi-1D regime: $`l_ew,tL_H,L_\varphi ,L_{so}L`$, with $`t`$ the sample thickness and $`l_e`$ the elastic mean free path of electrons (seeAAwl ; AleinerWav  and Appendix B).

In the fit procedure, we use the measured sample resistance and length given in Table 1. Our experimental setup being designed to measure resistance changes with an higher accuracy than absolute values, $`\mathrm{\Delta }R`$ is known only up to a small additive constant that we adjusted to fit each magnetoresistance curve. The width was fixed at a value $`w_{\mathrm{WL}}`$ giving the best overall fits for the complete set of data at various temperatures. The difference between the width $`w`$ measured from scanning electron microscope images and the best fit value $`w_{\mathrm{WL}}`$ (see Table 2) was found to be always less than 15%.NoteWidth  The spin-orbit length $`L_{so}`$ was obtained from fits of the magnetoresistance measured at the highest temperature. These parameters being determined, $`L_\varphi `$ remains as the only fit parameter for each magnetoresistance curve. Examples of fits are displayed as solid lines in Fig. 2.

In order to get $`\tau _\varphi `$ from $`L_\varphi ,`$ the diffusion coefficient $`D`$ was determined using the measured geometrical and electrical sample characteristics given in Table 1. Figure 3 shows $`\tau _\varphi `$ as a function of temperature for samples Ag(6N)c, Ag(5N)b, Au(6N) and Cu(6N)b. This confirms quantitatively the differences between samples already mentioned from the raw magnetoresistance data. On the one hand, the samples Ag(6N)c and Au(6N), fabricated using our purest (6N) silver and gold sources, present a large phase coherence time that keeps increasing at low temperature. On the other hand, the copper sample Cu(6N)b and the sample Ag(5N)b, fabricated using a silver source of smaller nominal purity (5N), present a much smaller phase coherence time and exhibit a plateau in $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$, in contradiction with the theoretical prediction for electron-electron interactions. This trend, illustrated in Fig. 3, has been confirmed by the measurements of several samples, as summarized in Table 2.

## IV Comparison with theoretical predictions - discussion

### IV.1 Purest silver and gold samples

Theory predicts that, in samples without extrinsic sources of decoherence, $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ is limited by the contributions of electron-electron $`\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}`$ and electron-phonon $`\tau _{\mathrm{ph}}`$ interactions. In principle, decoherence by electron-electron scattering is not purely an exponential process, hence the decoherence rates from electron-electron and electron-phonon scattering do not simply add. In practice (see Appendix B), the exact formula for the magnetoresistance is indistinguishable from Eq. (1) with a total decoherence rate:

$$\frac{1}{\tau _\varphi (T)}=\frac{1}{\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}(T)}+\frac{1}{\tau _{\mathrm{ph}}(T)}.$$
(2)
For our wires, whose width and thickness are smaller than $`L_\varphi `$, the quasi-1D prediction for electron-electron interactions appliesAleinerWav

$$\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}=\mathrm{}\left[\frac{(4/\pi )(R_\mathrm{K}/R)\nu _FSL}{(k_BT)^2}\right]^{1/3}\frac{1}{A_{thy}T^{2/3}},$$
(3)
where $`\nu _F`$ is the density of states per unit volume at the Fermi energy, and $`S`$ is the cross section of the wire.

In order to test the theoretical predictions, the measured $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ curves were fit with the functional form

$$\tau _\varphi ^1=AT^{2/3}+BT^3,$$
(4)
where the second term describes electron-phonon scattering, dominant at higher temperatures.phonons  Fits are shown as continuous lines in Fig. 4 (the fit parameters minimize the distance between the data points and the fit curve in a log-log plot). Equation (4) describes accurately the temperature dependence of $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ for samples Ag(6N)a, b, c and, with a slightly reduced fidelity, for samples Ag(6N)d and sample Au(6N). In all these samples, fabricated using 6N source materials of silver and gold, $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ follows very closely, below about 1 K, the $`1/T^{2/3}`$ dependence expected when electron-electron interaction is the dominant inelastic process. Nevertheless, if the exponent of $`T`$ is left as a fit parameter, better fits are obtained with smaller exponents ranging from $`0.59`$ for samples Ag(6N)d and Au(6N) up to $`0.64`$ for sample Ag(6N)c. This issue will be discussed in part V.B. The dashed line in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 is the quantitative prediction of Eq. (3) for electron-electron interactions in sample Ag(6N)c. The dephasing times are close, though always slightly smaller, to the theoretical prediction of Eq. (3). Table 3 lists the best fit parameters $`A`$, $`B`$, together with the prediction $`A_{thy}`$ of Eq. (3).

This data set casts doubt on the claim by Mohanty, Jariwala and WebbMJW  (MJW) that saturation of $`\tau _\varphi `$ is a universal phenomenon in mesoscopic wires. One can always argue that the saturation temperature for our silver samples is below 40 mK, hence unobservable in our experiments. However, the resistivity and dimensions of sample Ag(6N)a are similar to those of sample Au-3 in the MJW paper,MJW  which exhibits saturation of $`\tau _\varphi `$ starting at about 100 mK, and has a maximum value of $`\tau _\varphi ^{\mathrm{max}}=2`$ ns. In contrast, $`\tau _\varphi `$ reaches 9 ns in Ag(6N)a.

### IV.2 Silver 5N and copper samples

In silver samples made from a 5N purity source, the phase coherence time is systematically shorter than predicted by Eq. (3) and displays an unexpectedly flat temperature dependence below 400 mK. The same is true for all the copper samples we measured, independently of source purity.NoteAu  These trends are illustrated for samples Ag(5N)b and Cu(6N)b in Fig. 3.

What can be responsible for this anomalous behavior? There have been several theoretical suggestions regarding sources of extra dephasing. Some of these, such as the presence of a parasitic high frequency electromagnetic radiation,AAG  can be ruled out purely on experimental grounds. Indeed some samples do show a saturation of $`\tau _\varphi `$, while others of similar resistance and geometry, measured in the same cryostat, do not. This indicates that, in our experiments at least, the observed excess dephasing is not an artifact of the measurement. The main suggestions to explain the anomalous behavior of $`\tau _\varphi `$ are dephasing by very dilute magnetic impurities,dephasingMI ; PierrePHD  dephasing by two-level systems associated with lattice defects, IFS ; 2CK  and dephasing by electron-electron interactions through high energy electromagnetic modes.GZ

The correlation between source material purity and excess dephasing amongst silver samples fabricated using the exact same process but with either our 5N or 6N source material suggests that impurities are responsible for the anomalous temperature dependence of $`\tau _\varphi `$. The fact that, among all the 6N silver samples, $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ deviates the most from the prediction of electron-electron interactions in Ag(6N)d, fabricated in MSU (see Fig. 4) would mean that the 6N silver source material used at MSU contains more “dangerous” impurities than the one at Saclay.

The phase coherence time in the copper samples is always almost independent of temperature below about 200 mK down to our base temperature of 40 mK (see Gougam ; PierrePHD ; PierreAB ). However, as opposed to silver samples, this unexpected behavior is not correlated with the source material purity (5N or 6N). A likely explanation is provided by early measurements showing that the surface oxide of copper can cause dephasing.Haesendonck

## V Influence on $`\tau _\varphi `$ of very dilute magnetic impurities

Dephasing of conduction electrons by paramagnetic impurities has been known since 1980,dephasingMI  hence it may come as a surprise that this issue is still under debate today. In their Letter on the “saturation” of $`\tau _\varphi `$ at low temperature,MJW  Mohanty, Jariwala, and Webb studied the effect of intentionally doping their gold wires with iron impurities. They found that $`\tau _\varphi `$ in those samples did not truly saturate, but rather reached a plateau around 1 K and increased again below about 0.3 K. In addition, the presence of the iron impurities could be detected by a logarithmic contribution to the temperature dependence of the resistance $`R(T)`$, known as the Kondo effect. They concluded from those data that magnetic impurities were not the cause of the saturation of $`\tau _\varphi `$ they observed in their nominally pure gold samples. However, it is well known that the spin-flip scattering rate peaks near the Kondo temperature $`T_K`$, then decreases at lower temperature. While MJW showed convincingly that “saturation” of $`\tau _\varphi `$ in gold could not be caused by iron impurities with $`T_K0.3`$ K, their data do not exclude an effect of impurities with a lower Kondo temperature, such as manganese or chromium (see Table 4).

### V.1 Can dilute magnetic impurities account for a plateau in $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$?

To answer this question experimentally, we fabricated simultaneously three silver samples Ag(5N)b, Ag(5N)cMn0.3 and Ag(5N)dMn1, and very dilute manganese atoms were introduced by ion implantationnoteIonImp  in two of them. Manganese atoms form Kondo impurities in silver with a Kondo temperature $`T_K40`$ mK.

The phase coherence times extracted from WL corrections are shown as symbols in Fig. 5. Samples Ag(6N)c, evaporated separately, is shown as a reference. At the time of this experiment only the 5N purity silver source was available. Sample Ag(5N)b, in which no manganese atoms were implanted, already shows very little temperature dependence of $`\tau _\varphi 3.5`$ ns below 0.3 K. Nevertheless, introducing more manganese reduces further the phase coherence time as illustrated with samples Ag(5N)cMn0.3 and Ag(5N)dMn1 in which respectively 0.3 and 1 ppm of manganese were implanted. For instance, by adding 1 ppm of manganese, $`\tau _\varphi `$ was reduced by a factor of 6 while leaving $`\tau _\varphi `$ still nearly independent of temperature.

The effect of manganese on $`\tau _\varphi `$ is now compared with the existing theory of spin-flip scattering in the Kondo regime.

### V.2 Comparison with the theory of spin-flip scattering

In the presence of spin-flip scattering the phase coherence time reads

$$\frac{1}{\tau _\varphi }=\frac{1}{\tau _{ee}}+\frac{1}{\tau _{\mathrm{ph}}}+\frac{1}{\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}},$$
(5)
where $`1/\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}`$ is the spin-flip rate of electrons. This expression is valid when the spin-flip scattering time of the conduction electrons is longer than the spin relaxation time ($`\tau _K`$ for Korringa time) of the magnetic impurities themselves, *i.e.* $`\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}>\tau _K`$.Falko  This holds if

$$T\frac{c_{\mathrm{mag}}}{\nu _Fk_B}$$
(6)
where $`c_{\mathrm{mag}}`$ is the concentration per unit volume of magnetic impurities. In silver, gold and copper this criterion reads

$$T40\mathrm{mK}\times c_{\mathrm{mag}}[\mathrm{ppm}],$$
(7)
in which $`c_{\mathrm{mag}}[\mathrm{ppm}]`$ is now written in parts per million atoms (ppm). In the opposite limit ($`\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}<\tau _K`$), the impact of spin flip scattering on $`\tau _\varphi `$ depends on the physical effect probed. For weak localization corrections with strong spin-orbit coupling, spin-flip scattering enters then as $`2/\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}`$ in Eq. (5).dephasingMI ; Falko

As long as $`TT_K`$, $`\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}`$ is well described by the Nagaoka-Suhl formula Maple ; Haesendonck\_NS

$$\frac{1}{\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}}=\frac{c_{\mathrm{mag}}}{\pi \mathrm{}\nu _F}\frac{\pi ^2S(S+1)}{\pi ^2S(S+1)+\mathrm{ln}^2(T/T_K)},$$
(8)
with $`S`$ and $`T_K`$ respectively the spin and Kondo temperature of the magnetic impurities.

Upon cooling down, $`\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}`$ decreases when $`T`$ approaches $`T_K`$ (dotted line in Fig. 5), whereas the electron-electron scattering time $`\tau _{ee}`$ increases. The combination of both contributions can result in a nearly constant phase coherence time above $`T_K,`$ as shown by the solid lines in Fig. 5.

A quick way to estimate the concentration of magnetic impurities corresponding to a plateau in the phase coherence time is to compare $`\tau _\varphi ^{\mathrm{plateau}}`$ at the plateau to the prediction of Nagaoka-Suhl at $`T=T_K`$. In samples made of copper, gold and silver this gives

$$\tau _\varphi ^{\mathrm{plateau}}[\mathrm{ns}]0.6/c_{\mathrm{mag}}[\mathrm{ppm}].$$
(9)
Continuous lines in Fig. 5 are fits of the measured $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ to Eq. (5) using Eq. (8), with magnetic impurities of Kondo temperature $`T_K=40`$ mK as expected for manganese atoms. The parameters $`A`$ and $`B`$ in Eq. (4) could not be extracted independently for samples Ag(5N)b, cMn0.3 & dMn1. To avoid increasing unnecessarily the number of fit parameters, the values of $`A`$ and $`B`$ deduced from the fit of sample Ag(6N)c (dashed line) were used. Sample Ag(6N)c was chosen as a reference because its predicted electron-electron scattering rate is close to that of samples Ag(5N)b, Ag(5N)cMn0.3 and Ag(5N)dMn1. Following this procedure, the measurements could be reproduced accurately withnoteSpinFit  $`S=1/2`$ and $`c_{\mathrm{mag}}=0.13,`$ 0.39 and 0.96 ppm, respectively for samples Ag(5N)b, cMn0.3 & dMn1, in close agreement with implanted concentrations of manganese and compatible with the nominal purity of the Saclay 5N silver source. This confirms that the effect on $`\tau _\varphi `$ of the implantation of magnetic impurities with a low Kondo temperature is well understood, both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Looking back at the $`\tau _\varphi `$ data for samples Ag(6N)a, b, c, d and Au(6N) shown in Fig. 4, we note that the fits to those data would also improve with the addition of a very small quantity of magnetic impurities. We performed new fits to those data using Eqs. (5) and (8), with $`c_{\mathrm{mag}}`$ as an additional adjustable parameter. For the silver samples we kept $`T_K=40`$ mK as for manganese impurity atoms, whereas for the gold sample Au(6N) we chose $`T_K=10`$ mK as for chromium impurity atoms. The values of $`c_{\mathrm{mag}}`$ from the fits are 0.009, 0.011, 0.0024, 0.012, and 0.02 ppm respectively for samples Ag(6N)a, b, c, d, and Au(6N). The new fits are shown as continuous lines in Fig. 6 and the fit parameters are given in Table 5. Note that these concentrations are about 100 times smaller than the nominal total impurity concentrations of the sources. As a striking example to show how small these numbers are, 0.01 ppm of impurities in sample Ag(6N)d corresponds to about 3 impurity atoms every micrometer in the wire. Such small concentrations of Kondo impurities are essentially undetectable by any means other than measuring the phase coherence time, especially in thin films. Moreover, no commercial provider can guarantee such a high purity for the source material.

### V.3 Extremely dilute magnetic impurities and temperature dependence of the resistance

The temperature dependence of the resistance, $`R(T),`$ is often used as a probe of magnetic impurities, because of the well-known Kondo effect. Nevertheless, in thin wires, where the resistance also varies due to electron-electron interactions, it must be pointed out that $`R(T)`$ is not sensitive enough to detect small amounts of magnetic impurities. The contribution of electron-electron interactionsAleinerWav

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R(T)}{R}3.126\frac{R}{R_K}\frac{L_T}{L}\frac{C_{\mathrm{thy}}}{\sqrt{T}},$$
(10)
with $`L_T=\sqrt{\mathrm{}D/k_BT}`$ the thermal length, is much stronger and varies much more rapidly with temperature than the Kondo term, determined by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{\mathrm{Kondo}}B_K\mathrm{ln}(T)`$,rhoKondo  where $`B_K0.2`$ n$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.cm/ppm.rhoKondoB  In our wires where the resistivity is about $`\rho 3\mu \mathrm{\Omega }`$.cm, the corresponding relative variation of the resistance is about $`10^5`$ per decade of temperature for 1 ppm of Kondo impurities. This is more than an order of magnitude smaller than the typical contribution of electron-electron interactions between 100 mK and 1 K.

This is illustrated in the left panel of Fig. 7 with sample Ag(5N)dMn1 in which we implanted 1 ppm of manganese. The resistances are measured in a magnetic field $`B2050`$ mT, large enough to suppress the WL corrections but small enough to avoid freezing out the spin-flip scattering of conduction electrons by magnetic impurities. We checked on several samples showing anomalous dephasing that $`R(T)`$ is independent of the applied magnetic field.

A striking conclusion is that the phase coherence time is a much more sensitive probe of very dilute magnetic impurities than the temperature dependence of the resistance, which is dominated by electron-electron interactions at low temperature.

## VI Other explanations of anomalous dephasing

The evidence presented in the previous section shows that very dilute magnetic impurities could explain the anomalous dephasing frequently observed at low temperature. But are there other viable explanations?

### VI.1 Dephasing by high energy electromagnetic modes

Golubev and Zaikin (GZ) proposedGZ ; GZS  that zero temperature dephasing by high energy electromagnetic modes is responsible for the frequently observed saturation of $`\tau _\varphi `$ in metallic thin films. This theory, which is controversial,controversyGZS  predicts that the phase coherence time saturates at low temperature at $`\tau _0^{\mathrm{GZ}}`$ given byGZS

$$\frac{1}{\tau _0^{\mathrm{GZ}}}=\frac{\sqrt{2}\rho }{3R_K\pi \sqrt{D}}\left(\frac{b}{\tau _e}\right)^{3/2},$$
(11)
where $`b`$ is a constant numerical factor expected to be of order 1. It is interesting to point out that for a given material $`\tau _0^{\mathrm{GZ}}`$ is proportional to $`D^3`$ and is insensitive to the actual geometry of the sample.

Using this prediction, GZ were able to account for a subset of the experimental results published in Gougam ; Natelson  using the overall prefactor of the dephasing rate as an adjustable parameter.GZS  Note that, as explained by GZ in their latest article,GZS  the comparison with MJW data performed in GZ\_PRB  should be ignored because it was done using an expression for $`\tau _0^{\mathrm{GZ}}`$ that does not apply to the experiment, but is valid only when the elastic mean free path exceeds the transverse dimensions of the wires.

Since the exact prefactor is unknown, it is not possible to rule out this theory by comparison with a single experiment. Instead, we propose here to compare the predictive power of the GZ theory with the conventional theory of electron-electron interactions for many samples. This is done in Fig. 8. This figure includes all gold, silver and gold-palladium samples for which it has not been shown that magnetic impurities are the main source of decoherence at low temperature, plus sample Cu(5N)a which was used by GZ for comparison of their theory with experiments.GZS  (We do not show other copper samples or samples made from our 5N silver source, because they clearly contain magnetic impurities. See section VII and Anthore .) The X coordinate in Fig. 8 gives the ratio of the phase coherence time measured at the lowest temperature, $`\tau _\varphi ^{\mathrm{max}}`$, to $`\tau _0^{\mathrm{GZ}}`$, calculated from Eq. (11) with $`b=1`$. The Y coordinate is the ratio of $`\tau _\varphi ^{\mathrm{max}}`$ to $`\tau _{ee}(T_{\mathrm{min}})`$, the value calculated using the conventional theory (Eq. (3)) at the lowest temperature $`T_{\mathrm{min}}`$. Open symbols are samples for which $`\tau _\varphi `$ continues to increase at the lowest measurement temperature; upon cooling they move to the right. Full symbols are samples for which $`\tau _\varphi `$ is nearly constant at low temperature; they move downward when the temperature is reduced. As for theory, GZ predict that all full symbols should be aligned on a vertical line $`\tau _\varphi ^{\mathrm{max}}/\tau _0^{\mathrm{GZ}}=b^{3/2}`$, whereas open symbols would be located at $`\tau _\varphi ^{\mathrm{max}}/\tau _0^{\mathrm{GZ}}<b^{3/2}`$. In contrast, the conventional theory predicts that all data points should be aligned on the horizontal line $`\tau _\varphi ^{\mathrm{max}}/\tau _{ee}(T_{\mathrm{min}})=1`$. On this plot the data scatter in both directions. The most salient feature of the plot, however, is that the scatter in the horizontal direction extends over more than 5 orders of magnitude, whereas the scatter in the vertical direction extends over slightly more than one decade. The horizontal scatter indicates that GZ theory does not reproduce the dependence of $`\tau _\varphi `$ on sample parameters. In particular, the GZ prediction depends much too strongly on the diffusion coefficient, which varies considerably in MJW’s six gold samples.

While no theory explains all of the experimental data without any additional parameters, it appears that the conventional theory does a better job than the GZ theory to predict the low temperature value of $`\tau _\varphi `$.

### VI.2 Dephasing by two level systems

Two approaches to electron dephasing by two-level tunneling systems (TLS) have been proposed. The first, by Imry, Fukuyama, and Schwab,IFS  requires a non-standard distribution of TLS parameters. It was shown later that such a distribution would lead to large anomalies in the low-temperature specific heat, and in acoustic attenuation at very low temperature.AleinerTLS  The second approach describes the coupling between the conduction electrons and the TLS via the two-channel Kondo effect.2CK  In this model, the effect of TLS is very similar to that of magnetic impurities in the Kondo regime, at least at $`TT_K`$. The main criticism raised against this explanation is that, starting from any realistic model of a TLS, it may be impossible to reach the strong coupling regime where the Kondo temperature is larger than the tunneling level splitting.TLS\_TK\_Aleiner ; TLS\_TK\_Zawa  From the experimental point of view, measurements of $`\tau _\varphi `$ from the weak localization contribution to the magnetoresistance cannot discriminate between magnetic impurities and TLS.

## VII Test of the magnetic impurity hypothesis: probing $`\tau _\varphi (B)`$

A definitive test of the role of spin-flip scattering for the saturation of $`\tau _\varphi `$ at low temperature is to probe how the dephasing time depends on magnetic field. It is expected that spin-flip scattering is suppressed when the dynamics of magnetic impurities is frozen by application of a sufficiently large magnetic field $`B`$. Indeed, if the Zeeman splitting is much larger than $`k_BT`$, magnetic impurities stay in their ground state. As a result spin-flip collisions vanish and $`\tau _\varphi `$ should climb up to the value expected from electron-electron interactions (independent of $`B`$ as long as the cyclotron radius is much larger than the elastic mean free path). In the presence of spin $`1/2`$ impurities, and neglecting Kondo effect, the spin-flip scattering rate of electrons vanishes at large field as (see Appendix C and Meyer )

$$\frac{\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}(B=0)}{\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}(B)}=\frac{g\mu B/k_BT}{\mathrm{sinh}(g\mu B/k_BT)},$$
(12)
where $`g`$ is the renormalized gyromagnetic factor of the magnetic impurities.

One possible method to detect a variation in $`\tau _\varphi `$ with magnetic field is to measure the average amplitude $`\mathrm{\Delta }G_{\mathrm{UCF}}`$ of universal conductance fluctuations in a metallic wire as a function of magnetic field. This method has two drawbacks. First $`\mathrm{\Delta }G_{\mathrm{UCF}}\tau _\varphi ^{1/4}`$ depends only weakly on the phase coherence time. Second the large correlation field $`\mathrm{\Delta }B_{\mathrm{UCF}}h/(ewL_\varphi )`$ of conductance fluctuations in mesoscopic wires makes it difficult to obtain accurate estimates of the averaged $`\mathrm{\Delta }G_{\mathrm{UCF}}(B)`$ at low temperature in the field range below the relevant magnetic field scale $`g\mu Bk_BT`$. For example, in Cu(6N)b, $`\mathrm{\Delta }B_{\mathrm{UCF}}25\mathrm{mT}`$ at 40 mK, whereas the characteristic field needed to freeze the magnetic impurities is as low as $`k_BT/2\mu 55\mathrm{mT}.`$

We have chosen instead to probe the magnetic field dependence of $`\tau _\varphi `$ by measuring the Aharonov-Bohm (AB) oscillations in the magnetoresistance of ring-shaped samples. For this purpose, we have fabricated two copper rings of radius $`r=0.5`$ and 0.75 $`\mu `$m respectively on the same chip as samples Cu(6N)c and Cu(6N)d. The ring perimeters are chosen to be larger than or similar to the phase coherence length at $`B0`$ in order to increase the sensitivity to variations of $`\tau _\varphi `$. The averaged $`h/e`$ AB oscillations amplitude $`\mathrm{\Delta }G_{\mathrm{AB}}`$ is related to the phase coherence time throughNoteAB

$$\mathrm{\Delta }G_{\mathrm{AB}}=C\frac{e^2}{h}\frac{L_T}{\pi r}\sqrt{\frac{L_\varphi }{\pi r}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\pi r}{L_\varphi }\right],$$
(13)
where $`C`$ is a geometrical factor of order 1. The short period of AB oscillations with $`B`$ (5.5 and 2.5 mT for $`r=0.5`$ and 0.75 $`\mu `$m, respectively) allows to estimate accurately the magnetic field dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }G_{\mathrm{AB}}`$ on the much larger field scale needed to freeze the magnetic impurities.

This experiment was performed on copper samples because it is the material in which the presence of magnetic impurity was most questionable: no correlations were found between $`\tau _\varphi `$ and the copper source material purity; moreover, whereas in some samples $`\tau _\varphi `$ saturates at values as small as 0.2 ns (3 times smaller than in Ag(5N)dMn1) we observed neither a non-monotonic temperature dependence of $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$, as in Ag(5N)dMn1 (see Fig. 5), nor a Kondo contribution to $`R(T)`$.

Our experimental procedure and data analysis are detailed in PierreAB . Figure 9 shows the amplitude of AB oscillations measured across the ring in sample Cu(6N)d at $`T=40`$ and $`100`$ mK (symbols) as a function of reduced magnetic field $`2\mu B/k_BT`$. The data in Fig. 9 show that the amplitude of AB oscillations increases with magnetic field by a factor 8 at 100 mK and a factor 7 at 40 mK,NoteABnoise  on a characteristic field scale proportional to $`T`$.

The solid lines in Fig. 9 are fits to the simple model represented by Eqs. (12) and (13), explained in Appendix C. We assumed that $`\tau _\varphi `$ at large $`B`$ is limited only by electron-electron interactions and used the values given by theoretical prediction (Eq. (3)): $`\tau _\varphi =5.4`$ and $`9.9\mathrm{ns}`$ at 100 and 40 mK, respectively. The two remaining parameters, namely the gyromagnetic factor $`g`$ and the geometrical constantABfitnote  $`C`$, were adjusted to reproduce accurately our data. The best fit is obtained with $`g=1.08`$ and $`C=0.17`$. Note that a more rigorous approach to the magnetic-field dependence of AB oscillation amplitude has been published recently by Vavilov and Glazman.VavilovGlazman  Using their prediction (Eqs. (62) and (63) in VavilovGlazman ) with a magnetic impurity spinVG\_S  $`S=1/2`$ and $`g=0.90`$, we obtain a fit indistinguishable from the solid lines calculated with the simple model.

The impurity $`g`$-factors obtained from these fits, 1.08 and 0.90, are small, like the value $`g=1.36`$ found for electrons by neutron scattering in bulk CuO.Shirane

This set of experiments confirms that spin-flip collisions are responsible for the apparent low temperature saturation of $`\tau _\varphi `$ we observe in copper samples.

## VIII Comparison with energy exchange measurements

Parallel to this work, a systematic correlation was found between dephasing and energy exchange between electrons: all samples made of the same source material, using the same deposition system, either followed the theory of electron-electron interactions for both energy exchange and phase coherence, or displayed anomalous behaviors for both phenomena.Gougam ; PierreJLTP ; PierrePesc ; PierrePHD  This correlation suggests that magnetic impurities could also be responsible for anomalous energy exchange. Such a possibility had not been considered until recently because, all spin states being degenerate at zero magnetic field, magnetic impurities do not contribute to energy exchange in first order. However, Kaminsky and Glazman have pointed out that energy exchange in the presence of magnetic impurities may take place with an appreciable efficiency by a second-order process.KaminskyGlazman  The experimental proof that excess energy exchange observed in samples made of the 5N silver and copper sources result from dilute paramagnetic spins was obtained recently by measuring the dependence of energy exchange upon magnetic field.Anthore  Similarly to what was observed on the dephasing rate, the application of a large magnetic field on these samples reduces the rate of energy exchange. Note however that the amount of magnetic impurities needed to account for the measured energy exchange rates seems to be significantly larger than the estimations from $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$; in the case of copper, the obtained g-factor $`g=2.3`$ is also different. More experiments are needed to clarify these issues.

## IX Conclusion

By measuring the phase coherence time as a function of temperature on wires made of silver, gold and copper, from source materials of different purities, we have found that anomalous dephasing is correlated to source material purity in silver and gold samples, and systematic in copper samples. We showed experimentally that the presence of very dilute magnetic impurities with a low Kondo temperature in the host material can result in a broad plateau in $`\tau _\varphi (T)`$ while being undetected in the temperature dependence of the resistance. Measurement of the magnetic field dependence of Aharonov-Bohm oscillations on relatively large copper rings revealed that the phase coherence time increases with $`B`$ on a field scale proportional to the temperature. This confirms that an apparent “saturation” of $`\tau _\varphi `$ can be attributed to very dilute magnetic impurities.JJLin

In the silver and gold samples discussed in this paper, we impute the presence of magnetic impurities to the purity of the material sources. We found that large coherence times at 40 mK could be obtained in samples fabricated with the silver sources of the highest purity commercially available (6N). However, it is very difficult to rule out a small contamination during the evaporation process and eventually sample preparation. In the case of copper, the Kondo impurities probably originate from the copper oxide at the surface.Haesendonck

This work was supported by NSF grants DMR-9801841 and 0104178, and by the Keck Microfabrication Facility supported by NSF DMR-9809688. We acknowledge the assistance of S. Gautrot, O. Kaitasov, and J. Chaumont at the CSNSM in Orsay University, who performed the ion implantation in samples Ag(5N)cMn0.3 and Ag(5N)dMn1. We are grateful to I. Aleiner, B.L. Altshuler, H. Bouchiat, M.H. Devoret, V.I. Fal’ko, L.I. Glazman, D. Natelson, M.G. Vavilov and A.D. Zaikin for interesting discussions.

## X Appendix A: Electron cooling in transport measurements at low temperatures

Joule heating is a concern when transport measurements are performed at low temperatures. Any current results in the production of heat, which can be either transferred directly to the phonons in the wire, or to the electrons in the contact pads, assumed to be much larger than the wire. At sub-Kelvin temperatures, the first process becomes very inefficient. The reason is that the phonon emission rate for an electron with an excess energy $`k_BT`$ goes likePierrePHD  $`\gamma 5\kappa _{\mathrm{ph}}(k_BT)^3,`$ with $`\kappa _{\mathrm{ph}}10\mathrm{ns}^1\mathrm{meV}^3.`$ The distance it will travel before losing its extra energy is then $`\sqrt{D/\gamma }18\mu \mathrm{m}\times \left(\frac{T}{1\mathrm{K}}\right)^{3/2}`$ for a typical diffusion coefficient $`D=100\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}.`$ At $`T=40\mathrm{mK},`$ $`\sqrt{D/\gamma }2.2\mathrm{mm},`$ a very macroscopic distance! Therefore one must take care that the electron’s energy never gets so large at low temperature. Taken alone, the cooling by the contact pads through electronic heat transport results in a temperature profile in the wire

$$T_e(x)=\sqrt{T^2+\frac{3}{\pi ^2}x(1x)\left(\frac{eV}{k_B}\right)^2},$$
(14)
with $`T_e`$ the electron temperature in the contacts placed at the ends of the wire, assumed to be equal to the temperature of the phonons, $`x`$ the relative position along the wire, and $`V`$ the voltage across the wire. For $`T=0`$, the maximum temperature is $`\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2\pi }\left(\frac{eV}{k_B}\right)3.2\mathrm{K}\times \frac{V}{1\mathrm{mV}}.`$ By limiting the voltage across the sample to $`eV=k_BT,`$ the maximal electron temperature is $`T\sqrt{1+\frac{3}{4\pi ^2}}1.04T.`$ With such a low applied voltage, the phase coherence time, supposed to increase as $`T_e^{2/3}`$ at low temperature, varies through the sample by $`11.04^{2/3}2\%,`$ which is sufficiently small for most purposes. However, at very low temperature, a measurement of a voltage of order $`k_BT/e`$ might become very time consuming if one considers that the input voltage noise for the best room-temperature commercial amplifiers is about $`1\mathrm{nV}/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}`$ and that the weak localization correction to the conductance is about $`10^3`$ of the total signal. For example at 10 mK, $`10^3k_BT/e1\mathrm{nV},`$ and an integration time of 100 s for each conductance measurement is needed to get a signal to noise ratio of 10. In fact, this estimation is often too pessimistic because cooling by phonons does play a role for long wires.HennySchonenberger  In order to evaluate this effect precisely, one has to solve the complete heat equation, which can be written in reduced units ($`t_e(x)=\frac{T_e(x)}{T},`$ $`v=\frac{eV}{k_BT}`$)

$$v^2+\frac{\pi ^2}{6}\frac{d^2}{dx^2}t_e^2(x)\left(\frac{T}{T_{co}}\right)^3\left(t_e^5(x)1\right)=0,$$
(15)
in which the first term describes Joule heating, the second the thermal conductivity of electrons, assuming Wiedemann-Franz law, and the last one the coupling to phonons.Wellstood ; PierrePHD  We have defined a crossover temperature

$$T_{co}=(\mathrm{\Sigma }\rho L^2(e/k_B)^2)^{1/3},$$
(16)
with $`L`$ the length of the wire, $`\rho `$ its resistivity, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ the electron-phonon coupling constantsigma  (typically $`\mathrm{\Sigma }110\mathrm{nW}/\mu \mathrm{m}^3/\mathrm{K}^5`$ in metallic thin films on Si substrate). The resulting temperature profile is shown in Fig. 10 for typical values: we consider a silver wire ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }3\mathrm{nW}/\mu \mathrm{m}^3/\mathrm{K}^5`$ from Table 3) with $`D=100`$ $`\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}`$, $`L=0.2`$ $`\mathrm{mm}`$, at $`T=200`$ $`\mathrm{mK}`$, for $`\frac{eV}{k_BT}=3.`$ The dotted line indicates the solution without phonons, the dashed line the solution without electronic heat transport. For this set of parameters, the crossover temperature is $`T_{co}120`$ mK. Hence, at 200 mK phonons reduce significantly the maximum electron temperature, which does not exceed the bath temperature by more than 16%. At 100 mK, cooling by phonon emission is inefficient, and the maximum electron temperature is 27% above $`T.`$

The analysis of the exact solutions of this equation allows to distinguish two opposite regimes: for $`TT_{co},`$ electrons are decoupled from phonons (cooling by phonons will become active only if the applied voltage is so high that the maximal temperature is above $`T_{co}`$), and temperature is given by the electronic conductivity alone, see Eq. (14). This is the difficult regime, where the maximal voltage is of the order of $`k_BT/e.`$ In the opposite situation $`TT_{co},`$ heat transfer to the contacts can be neglected, and cooling by phonons rules the game. The temperature of the electrons is then nearly homogeneous, with $`\frac{T_e}{T}\left(1+\left(\frac{T_{co}}{T}\right)^3v^2\right)^{1/5}`$ and for $`\left(\frac{T_{co}}{T}\right)^3v^21`$ the temperature does not exceed $`T`$ excessively: $`T_eT+\frac{1}{5}\frac{T_{co}^3(eV/k_B)^2}{T^4}.`$ One should thus fabricate wires as long as possible, in order to have a small crossover temperature $`T_{co}`$ which allows to work at larger voltages.

In order to test the validity of this calculation, we performed a control experiment in which electrons were intentionally heated by applying *ac* currents. The sample, similar to the others presented in this review, consists of a $`1.79`$ $`\mathrm{mm}`$-long, 150 nm-wide and 45 nm-thick wire made out of a 6N purity silver source. The diffusion coefficient $`D=139`$ $`\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}`$ results in a cross-over temperature $`T_{co}=30\mathrm{mK}.`$ We extracted the phase coherence length $`L_\varphi `$ from the magnetoresistance. For each magnetoresistance trace we show in Fig. 11 two symbols, one open and one full, at a Y-coordinate given by the corresponding value of $`L_\varphi `$. Open symbols are at the X-coordinate given by the cryostat temperature $`T`$ at which the measurement was performed, whereas full symbols are at the X-coordinate given by the calculated electron temperature $`T_{\mathrm{calc}}.`$ Since the magnetoresistance is given by $`L_\varphi T^{1/3}`$, $`T_{\mathrm{calc}}`$ was calculated from the time- and position-average of $`T_e^{1/3}`$, using temperature profiles obtained with Eq. (15). For example, the pair of data points at $`L_\varphi 10.4\mu \mathrm{m}`$ corresponds to $`T=40\mathrm{mK},`$ $`V_{ac}=0.86\mathrm{mV}rms,`$ leading to $`T_{\mathrm{calc}}=245\mathrm{mK}`$. The data points with large heating ($`T_{\mathrm{calc}}T`$) as well as those with little heating ($`T_{\mathrm{calc}}T`$) fall close to a single line $`L_\varphi T^{1/3}`$, indicating that the electron temperature is correctly modelled.

## XI Appendix B: Dephasing by electron-electron interactions

Assuming that we can restrict ourself to two body interactions, the dephasing rate, or inverse lifetime, $`1/\tau _{\mathrm{in}}(E,T)`$ of an electron at energy $`E`$ coupled only to the electronic fluid at temperature $`T`$ results from all collision processes allowed by the Pauli exclusion principle:

$$\tau _{\mathrm{in}}^1(E,T)_{|\epsilon |\mathrm{}/\tau _\varphi }𝑑\epsilon K(\epsilon )(1f_T(E\epsilon ))h(\epsilon ,T)$$
(17)
where $`f_T(E)`$ is the Fermi function at temperature $`T`$, $`K(\epsilon )`$ is the interaction “Kernel” of the screened Coulomb interaction, proportional to the modulus square of the interaction matrix element for an exchanged energy $`\epsilon `$, and

$`h(\epsilon ,T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑E^{}f_T(E^{})(1f_T(E^{}+\epsilon ))`$ (18)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon }{1\mathrm{exp}(\epsilon /k_BT)}}.`$
The low energy cut-off $`|\epsilon |\mathrm{}/\tau _\varphi `$ in Eq. (17) is introduced because fluctuations on timescales longer than the electron’s life-time can be considered as static.AA

The interaction kernel $`K(\epsilon )`$ depends only on $`\epsilon `$ since the energies of interacting electrons are close to the Fermi energy $`E_F`$ and $`\epsilon k_BTE_F`$. Our samples are quasi-1D because the width and thickness of the wires are smaller than the length $`L_\epsilon =\sqrt{\mathrm{}D/\epsilon }`$ for the probed energy exchanged. For quasi-1D samples the interaction kernel readsAndreevKamenev

$$K(\epsilon )=\kappa |\epsilon |^{3/2},$$
(19)
with

$$\kappa ^1=\mathrm{}\sqrt{\frac{\pi \nu _FSL}{4}\frac{R_K}{R}}.$$
(20)
The dephasing rate $`1/\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}(T)`$ is the inverse lifetime averaged over thermal excitations

$$1/\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}(T)=𝑑E\frac{f_T(E)(1f_T(E))}{k_BT}\tau _{\mathrm{in}}^1(E,T).$$
(21)
Injecting Eqs. (17) and (19) into Eq. (21) we obtainnoteReplaceCutoff

$$1/\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}(T)_{\mathrm{}/\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\epsilon \frac{\kappa \sqrt{\epsilon }}{k_BT}\frac{\mathrm{exp}(\epsilon /k_BT)}{(1\mathrm{exp}(\epsilon /k_BT))^2}.$$
(22)
This expression shows that the effect of electron-electron interactions on quantum coherence in mesoscopic wires is dominated by processes with a small exchanged energy $`\epsilon \mathrm{}/\tau _\varphi `$. It is interesting to point out that this implies that a sample is quasi-1D with respect to decoherence as long as the phase coherence length $`L_\varphi =\sqrt{D\tau _\varphi }`$ is large compared to its transverse dimensions and small compared to its length. This is not true for energy exchange, for which the dimensionality is determined by the length associated with the largest exchanged energy.

In order to obtain an analytical expression for $`\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}(T)`$ we make the following approximation:

$$\frac{\mathrm{exp}(\epsilon /k_BT)}{(1\mathrm{exp}(\epsilon /k_BT))^2}\frac{1}{(\epsilon /k_BT)^2}.$$
(23)
This approximation is justified since the integral is dominated by small energy exchanges. This leads to

$$\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}\mathrm{}\left[\frac{(\pi /16)(R_\mathrm{K}/R)\nu _FSL}{(k_BT)^2}\right]^{1/3},$$
(24)
where we used Eq. (20) for the interaction kernel.

The calculation of $`\tau _\varphi `$ described above makes use of a low energy cut-off, therefore the prefactor in Eq. (24) is not reliable. To solve this technical difficulty, Altshuler, Aronov and KhmelnitskyAAK  calculated the effect of electron-electron interactions through the interaction of one electron with the fluctuating electromagnetic field resulting from other electrons at thermal equilibrium. Within this approach it is possible to calculate directly the conductivity taking into account electron-electron interactions. The dephasing rate is then obtained without reference to the energy decay rate. Neglecting spin-orbit coupling, this calculation yieldsAleinerWav

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R}{R}(B,T)=\frac{2R}{R_K}\frac{\sqrt{D\tau _N}}{L}\frac{\mathrm{Ai}(\tau _N/\tau _H)}{\mathrm{Ai}^{}(\tau _N/\tau _H)},$$
(25)
with

$`\tau _N`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(R_\mathrm{K}/R)\nu _FSL}{2\pi (k_BT)^2}}\right]^{1/3},`$
$`\tau _H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\nu e^2RS}{L}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi _0}{2\pi wB}}\right)^2,`$
where $`\varphi _0=h/e4.1\times 10^{15}`$ T$``$m2 is the flux quantum, $`\mathrm{Ai}(x)`$ is the Airy function and $`\mathrm{Ai}^{}(x)`$ its derivative. The time $`\tau _N`$ is often called Nyquist time in reference to the fluctuation-dissipation theorem used to evaluate the electromagnetic fluctuations for the calculation of weak localization corrections.

Since expression (25) includes electron-electron interactions, it should be possible to deduce the contribution $`\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}`$ of the screened Coulomb interaction on the phase coherence time. This can be done by pointing out that

$$\frac{\mathrm{Ai}(x)}{\mathrm{Ai}^{}(x)}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1/2+x}}(1+ϵ(x)),$$
(26)
where $`|ϵ(x)|<0.04`$ for $`x>0`$. In practice, the experimental resolution is not sufficient to distinguish a relative discrepancy smaller than 4% of the amplitude of weak localization corrections, which are themselves smaller than 1% of the measured signal. Hence we can write

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R}{R}(B,T)=\frac{2R}{R_KL}\sqrt{\frac{D}{1/2\tau _N+1/\tau _H}}.$$
(27)
A comparison with Eq. (1) (neglecting spin-orbit coupling) allows us to extract the phase coherence time when it is limited by electron-electron interactions:

$`\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(4/\pi )(R_\mathrm{K}/R)\nu _FSL}{(k_BT)^2}}\right]^{1/3},`$
$`=`$ $`2\tau _N.`$
This expression of the phase coherence time $`\tau _{\mathrm{ee}}`$ is larger by a factor $`4/\pi ^{2/3}1.9`$ than the cut-off-dependent estimation in Eq. (24).

## XII Appendix C: Magnetic field dependence of spin-flip scattering

This appendix present a simple calculation of electron spin-flip scattering from magnetic impurities as a function of applied magnetic field $`B`$. The calculation is carried out at first order in spin-flip scattering, neglecting the Kondo effect. Moreover we consider here, for simplicity, magnetic impurities of spin $`1/2`$.

The spin flip rate $`\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}^1(E,B)`$ of an electron at energy $`E`$ is obtained from the Fermi Golden Rule

$`\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}^1(E,B)`$ $`=`$ $`c_{\mathrm{mag}}\lambda \{P_{}(1f_T(Eg\mu B))`$ (29)
$`+P_+(1f_T(E+g\mu B))\},`$
where $`c_{\mathrm{mag}}`$ is the concentration of magnetic impurities, $`\lambda `$ is proportional to the modulus square of the interaction potential electron-magnetic impurity and $`P_\pm `$ is the probability to have the magnetic impurity in the up ($`+`$) or down ($``$) state relative to the magnetic field direction $`B`$. In absence of Kondo effect $`\lambda `$ is approximated as independent of energy and magnetic field.

Since at thermal equilibrium $`P_\pm =f_T(\pm g\mu B)`$, we obtain

$$\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}^1(E,B)=\frac{c_{\mathrm{mag}}\lambda (1+\mathrm{exp}(E/k_BT))/2}{\mathrm{cosh}(E/k_BT)+\mathrm{cosh}(g\mu B/k_BT)}.$$
(30)
The spin-flip rate $`\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}^1(B)`$ is averaged over electronic excitations

$$\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}^1(B)=_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑E\frac{f_T(E)(1f_T(E))}{k_BT}\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}^1(E,B),$$

which gives

$$\frac{\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}(B=0)}{\tau _{\mathrm{sf}}(B)}=\frac{g\mu B/k_BT}{\mathrm{sinh}(g\mu B/k_BT)}.$$
(31)
This result, also given in Meyer , is a finite-temperature generalization of the expression used by Benoit et al.Benoit  A rigorous theoretical calculation of the Aharonov-Bohm oscillation amplitude $`\mathrm{\Delta }G_{h/e}`$ in presence of magnetic impurities under a large externally applied magnetic field was first presented by Fal’ko.FalkoAB . A complete derivation of the magnetic field dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }G_{h/e}`$ from first principles was finally published recently by Vavilov and Glazman.VavilovGlazman  As discussed in Section VII, the Vavilov-Glazman crossover function for $`S=1/2`$ is nearly indistinguishable from ours.