Dominant mobility modulation by the electric field effect at the LaAlO3/SrTiO3 interface.

Physical review letters · 2009 · Mixed · Insufficient evidence

← Research stream
MixedInsufficient evidencePaper 3332

Using magnetotransport studies of a gated LaAlO3/SrTiO3 interface structure, mobility variation was reported to be almost 5 times that of the sheet carrier density. Superconductivity was reported to be suppressible at both positive and negative gate bias, sug…

Study snapshot

PublicationPhysical review letters · 2009
Study typeother
Reported directionMixed
Evidence ratingInsufficient

Abstract

Caviglia et al. [Nature (London) 456, 624 (2008)] have found that the superconducting LaAlO3/SrTiO3 interface can be gate modulated. A central issue is to determine the principal effect of the applied electric field. Using magnetotransport studies of a gated structure, we find that the mobility variation is almost 5 times that of the sheet carrier density. Furthermore, superconductivity can be suppressed at both positive and negative gate bias. These results indicate that the relative disorder strength strongly increases across the superconductor-insulator transition.

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeother
Effect directionmixed
PopulationNot supplied
Sample sizeNot supplied
ExposureNot supplied
Evidence strengthInsufficientConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Using magnetotransport studies of a gated LaAlO3/SrTiO3 interface structure, mobility variation was reported to be almost 5 times that of the sheet carrier density. Superconductivity was reported to be suppressible at both positive and negative gate bias, suggesting increased relative disorder strength across the superconductor-insulator transition.

Outcomes measured

  • mobility variation
  • sheet carrier density
  • superconductivity suppression
  • superconductor-insulator transition
  • relative disorder strength

Limitations

  • No sample size reported in the abstract.
  • Electric field parameters (magnitude, waveform/frequency) are not specified in the abstract.
  • Study context is a condensed-matter gated interface system rather than environmental/biomedical EMF exposure.
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "other",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "applied electric field (gate bias)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "mobility variation",
    "sheet carrier density",
    "superconductivity suppression",
    "superconductor-insulator transition",
    "relative disorder strength"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Using magnetotransport studies of a gated LaAlO3/SrTiO3 interface structure, mobility variation was reported to be almost 5 times that of the sheet carrier density. Superconductivity was reported to be suppressible at both positive and negative gate bias, suggesting increased relative disorder strength across the superconductor-insulator transition.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "No sample size reported in the abstract.",
    "Electric field parameters (magnitude, waveform/frequency) are not specified in the abstract.",
    "Study context is a condensed-matter gated interface system rather than environmental/biomedical EMF exposure."
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "LaAlO3/SrTiO3 interface",
    "gate modulation",
    "electric field effect",
    "magnetotransport",
    "mobility",
    "sheet carrier density",
    "superconductivity",
    "superconductor-insulator transition",
    "disorder"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": []
}
AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1103/physrevlett.103.226802
PubMed: 20366118

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library