Quantumsqueezing effects of strained multilayer graphene NEMS
 Yang Xu^{1}Email author,
 Sheping Yan^{1},
 Zhonghe Jin^{1}Email author and
 Yuelin Wang^{2}
DOI: 10.1186/1556276X6355
© Xu et al; licensee Springer. 2011
Received: 1 March 2011
Accepted: 20 April 2011
Published: 20 April 2011
Abstract
Quantum squeezing can improve the ultimate measurement precision by squeezing one desired fluctuation of the two physical quantities in Heisenberg relation. We propose a scheme to obtain squeezed states through graphene nanoelectromechanical system (NEMS) taking advantage of their thin thickness in principle. Two key criteria of achieving squeezing states, zeropoint displacement uncertainty and squeezing factor of strained multilayer graphene NEMS, are studied. Our research promotes the measured precision limit of graphenebased nanotransducers by reducing quantum noises through squeezed states.
Introduction
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle, or the standard quantum limit [1, 2], imposes an intrinsic limitation on the ultimate sensitivity of quantum measurement systems, such as atomic forces [3], infinitesimal displacement [4], and gravitationalwave [5] detections. When detecting very weak physical quantities, the mechanical motion of a nanoresonator or nanoelectromechanical system (NEMS) is comparable to the intrinsic fluctuations of the systems, including thermal and quantum fluctuations. Thermal fluctuation can be reduced by decreasing the temperature to a few mK, while quantum fluctuation, the quantum limit determined by Heisenberg relation, is not directly dependent on the temperature. Quantum squeezing is an efficient way to decrease the system quantum [6–8]. Thermomechanical noise squeezing has been studied by Rugar and Grutter [9], where the resonator motion in the fundamental mode was parametrically squeezed in one quadrature by periodically modulating the effective spring constant at twice its resonance frequency. Subsequently, Suh et al. [10] have successfully achieved parametric amplification and backaction noise squeezing using a qubitcoupled nanoresonator.
where E is the Young's modulus of the material, T _{s} is the tension on the film, A is 0.162 for a cantilever and A is 1.03 for a doubleclamped film [13]. Therefore, Δx _{zp} of the fundamental mode of a NEMS device with a doubleclamped film can be given by Δx _{zp} = ΔX _{1} = ΔX _{2} = (ħ/2M _{eff} w)^{1/2}. In a mechanical system, quantum squeezing can reduce the displacement uncertainty Δx _{zp}.
Recently, freestanding graphene membranes have been fabricated [14], providing an excellent platform to study quantumsqueezing effects in mechanical systems. Meanwhile, a graphene membrane is sensitive to external influences, such as atomic forces or infinitesimal mass (e.g., 10^{21} g) due to its atomic thickness. Although graphene films can be used to detect very infinitesimal physical quantities, the quantum fluctuation noise Δx _{zp} of graphene NEMS devices (approx. 10^{2} nm), could easily surpass the magnitudes of signals caused by external influences. Thus, quantum squeezing becomes necessary to improve the ultimate precision of graphenebased transducers with ultrahigh sensitivity. In this study, we have studied quantumsqueezing effects of strained multilayer graphene NEMS based on experimental devices proposed by Chen et al. [15].
Results
Displacement uncertainty of graphene NEMS
Calculated Δx _{zp} (10^{4}nm) of monolayer (Mon), bilayer (Bi), and trilayer (Tri) graphene versus strain ε (L = 1.1 μm, W = 0.2 μm)
ε= 0  ε= 4 × 10^{5}  ε= 2 × 10^{4}  

Mon  Bi  Tri  Mon  Bi  Tri  Mon  Bi  Tri 
34.0  17.0  11.3  6.05  4.23  3.39  3.67  2.59  2.10 
According to the results in Figure 2 and Table 1, we find Δx _{zp} ^{large strain} < Δx _{zp} ^{small strain}; one possible reason is that larger applied strain results in smaller fundamental angular frequency and Δx _{zp}, therefore, the quantum noise can be reduced.
Quantumsqueezing effects of graphene NEMS
To analyze quantumsqueezing effects in graphene NEMS devices, a backactionevading circuit model is used to suppress the direct electrostatic force acting on the film and modulate the effective spring constant k of the membrane film. Two assumptions are used, namely, the film width W is on the micrometer scale and X _{1} >> d, where d is the distance between the film and the substrate. Applying a pump voltage V _{m}(t) = V[1+ sin(2w _{m} t + θ)], between the membrane film and the substrate, the spring constant k will have a sinusoidal modulation k _{m}(t), which is given by k _{m}(t) = sin(2w _{m} t + θ)C _{T} V ^{2}/2d ^{2}, where C _{T} is the total capacitance composed of structure capacitance C _{0}, quantum capacitance C _{q}, and screen capacitance C _{s} in series [18]. The quantum capacitance C _{q} and screen capacitance C _{s} cannot be neglected [18–20] owing to a graphene film thickness on the atomic scale. The quantum capacitance of monolayer graphene [21, 22] is C _{q} ^{monolayer} = 2e^{2} n ^{1/2}/(ħv _{F}π^{1/2}), where n is the carrier concentration, e is the elementary charge, and v _{F} ≈ c/300, where c is the velocity of light, with bilayer C _{q} ^{bilayer} = 2 × 0.037m _{e} e ^{2}/πħ ^{2}, and trilayer C _{q} ^{trilayer} = 2 × 0.052m _{e} e ^{2}/πħ ^{2}, where m _{e} is the electron mass [23].
R values of monolayer graphene versus various strain ε and voltage V (L = 1.1 μm, W = 0.2 μm, and T = 300 K with Q = 125)
ε= 0  ε= 4 × 10^{5}  ε= 2 × 10^{4}  

V = 2 V  38.33  198.15  259.14 
V = 10 V  7.669  42.84  69.86 
R values of monolayer graphene versus various strain ε and voltage V (L = 1.1 μm, W = 0.2 μm, and T = 5 K with Q = 14000)
ε= 0  ε= 4 × 10^{5}  ε= 2 × 10^{4}  

V = 2 V  0.468  2.620  4.319 
V = 10 V  0.0936  0.524  0.867 
In contrast to the previous squeezing analysis proposed by Rugar and Grutter [9], in which steadystate solutions have been assumed and the minimum R is 1/2, we use timedependent pumping techniques to prevent X _{2} from growing without bound as t → ∞, which should be terminated after the characteristic time t _{ct} = ln(QC _{T} V ^{2}/4M _{eff} w ^{2} d ^{2})4M _{eff} wd ^{2}/C _{T} V ^{2}, when R achieves its limiting value. Therefore, we have no upper bound on R. Figure 4b has shown the time dependence of ΔX _{1} and ΔX _{2} in units of t _{ct}, and the quantum squeezing of the monolayer graphene NEMS has reached the limiting value after one t _{ct} time. Also, to make the required heat of conversion from mechanical energy negligible during the pump stage, t _{ct} << τ must be satisfied. We find t _{ct}/τ ≈ 1.45 × 10^{5} for the monolayer graphene parameters considered in the text.
Discussion
By choosing the dimensions of a typical monolayer graphene NEMS device in [15] with L = 1.1 μm, W = 0.2 μm, T = 5 K, Q = 14000, V = 2.5 V, and ε = 0, we obtain Δx _{zp} = 0.0034 nm and R = 0.374. After considering quantum squeezing effects based on our simulation, Δx _{zp} can be reduced to 0.0013 nm. With a length of 20 μm, Δx _{zp} can be as large as 0.0145 nm, a radiofrequency singleelectrontransistor detection system can in principle attain such sensitivities [25]. In order to verify the quantum squeezing effects, a displacement detection scheme need be developed.
Conclusions
In conclusion, we presented systematic studies of zeropoint displacement uncertainty and quantum squeezing effects in strained multilayer graphene NEMS as a function of the film dimensions L, W, h, temperature T, applied voltage V, and strain ε applied on the film. We found that zeropoint displacement uncertainty Δx _{zp} of strained graphene NEMS is inversely proportional to the thickness of graphene and the strain applied on graphene. By considering quantum capacitance, a series of squeezing factor R values have been obtained based on the model, with R _{monolayer} < R _{bilayer} < R _{trilayer} and R _{small strain} < R _{large strain} being found. Furthermore, highsensitivity graphenebased nanotransducers can be developed based on quantum squeezing.
Abbreviation
 NEMS:

nanoelectromechanical system.
Declarations
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge Prof. Raphael Tsu at UNCC, Prof. JeanPierre Leburton at UIUC, Prof. Yuanbo Zhang at Fudan University, Prof. Jack Luo at University of Bolton, and Prof. Bin Yu at SUNY for fruitful discussions and comments. This study is supported by the National Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 61006077) and the National Basic Research Program of China (Grant Nos. 2007CB613405 and 2011CB309501). Dr. Y. Xu is also supported by the Excellent Young Faculty Awards Program (Zijin Plan) at Zhejiang University and the Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education (SRFDP with Grant No. 20100101120045).
Authors’ Affiliations
References
 LaHaye MD, Buu O, Camarota B, Schwab KC: Approaching the quantum limit of a nanomechanical resonator. Science 2004, 304: 74–77. 10.1126/science.1094419View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Blencowe M: Nanomechanical quantum limits. Science 2004, 304: 56–57. 10.1126/science.1095768View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Caves CM, Thorne KS, Drever RWP, Sandberg VD, Zimmermann M: ON the measurement of a weak classical force coulped to a quantummechanical oscillator. I. Issues of principle. Rev Mod Phys 1980, 52: 341–392. 10.1103/RevModPhys.52.341View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Mozyrsky D, Martin I, Hastings MB: Quantumlimited sensitivity of singleelectrontransistorbased displacement detectors. Phys Rev Lett 2004, 92: 083103.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Hollenhorst JN: Quantum limits on resonantmass gravitationalradiation detectors. Phys Rev D 1979, 19: 1669–1679. 10.1103/PhysRevD.19.1669View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Blencowe M: Quantum electromechanical systems. Phys Rep Rev Sec Phys Lett 2004, 395: 159–222.Google Scholar
 Giovannetti V, Lloyd S, Maccone L: Quantumenhanced measurements: beating the standard quantum limit. Science 2004, 306: 1330–1336. 10.1126/science.1104149View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Blencowe MP, Wybourne MN: Quantum squeezing of mechanical motion for micronsized cantilevers. Physica B 2000, 280: 555–556. 10.1016/S09214526(99)018621View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Rugar D, Grutter P: Mechanical parametric amplification and thermomechanical noise squeezing. Phys Rev Lett 1991, 67: 699–702. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.67.699View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Suh J, LaHaye MD, Echternach PM, Schwab KC, Roukes ML: Parametric amplification and backaction noise squeezing by a qubitcoupled nanoresonator. Nano Lett 2010, 10: 3990–3994. 10.1021/nl101844rView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Ekinci KL, Yang YT, Roukes ML: Ultimate limits to inertial mass sensing based upon nanoelectromechanical systems. J Appl Phys 2004, 95: 2682–2689. 10.1063/1.1642738View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Ekinci KL, Roukes ML: Nanoelectromechanical systems. Rev Sci Instrum 2005, 76: 061101. 10.1063/1.1927327View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Bunch JS, van der Zande AM, Verbridge SS, Frank IW, Tanenbaum DM, Parpia JM, Craighead HG, McEuen PL: Electromechanical resonators from graphene sheets. Science 2007, 315: 490–493. 10.1126/science.1136836View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Novoselov KS, Geim AK, Morozov SV, Jiang D, Zhang Y, Dubonos SV, Grigorieva IV, Firsov AA: Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films. Science 2004, 306: 666–669. 10.1126/science.1102896View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Chen CY, Rosenblatt S, Bolotin KI, Kalb W, Kim P, Kymissis I, Stormer HL, Heinz TF, Hone J: Performance of monolayer graphene nanomechanical resonators with electrical readout. Nat Nanotechnol 2009, 4: 861–867. 10.1038/nnano.2009.267View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Ni ZH, Wang HM, Kasim J, Fan HM, Yu T, Wu YH, Feng YP, Shen ZX: Graphene thickness determination using reflection and contrast spectroscopy. Nano Lett 2007, 7: 2758–2763. 10.1021/nl071254mView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Lee C, Wei XD, Kysar JW, Hone J: Measurement of the elastic properties and intrinsic strength of monolayer graphene. Science 2008, 321: 385–388. 10.1126/science.1157996View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Xu Y, Aluru NR: Pullin/out analysis of nano/microelectromechanical switches with defective oxide layers. Appl Phys Lett 2009, 95: 073112. 10.1063/1.3211111View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Tang Z, Xu Y, Li G, Aluru NR: Physical models for coupled electromechanical analysis of silicon nanoelectromechanical systems. J Appl Phys 2005, 97: 114304. 10.1063/1.1897483View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Xu Y, Aluru NR: Multiscale electrostatic analysis of silicon nanoelectromechanical systems (NEMS) via heterogeneous quantum models. Phys Rev B 2008, 77: 075313.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Fang T, Konar A, Xing HL, Jena D: Carrier statistics and quantum capacitance of graphene sheets and ribbons. Appl Phys Lett 2007, 91: 092109. 10.1063/1.2776887View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Xia JL, Chen F, Li JH, Tao NJ: Measurement of the quantum capacitance of graphene. Nat Nanotechnol 2009, 4: 505–509. 10.1038/nnano.2009.177View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Koshino M, Ando T: Orbital diamagnetism in multilayer graphenes: systematic study with the effective mass approximation. Phys Rev B 2007, 76: 085425.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Grishchuk LP, Sazhin MV: Squeezed quantum states of a harmonicoscillator in the problem of detecting gravitationalwaves. Zh Eksp Teor Fiz 1983, 84: 1937–1950.Google Scholar
 Turin VO, Korotkov AN: Analysis of the radiofrequency singleelectron transistor with large quality factor. Appl Phys Lett 2003, 83: 2898–2900. 10.1063/1.1614840View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Copyright
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.