[Effect of electric field on exciton energy level width in quantum well].

Guang pu xue yu guang pu fen xi = Guang pu · 2001 · Unclear · Insufficient evidence

← Research stream
UnclearInsufficient evidencePaper 3865

Using a quasi-classical particle concept and derived energy-uncertainty formula applied to a GaAs/GaAlAs quantum well in an electric field, calculated exciton energy level widths were reported to agree with measured results. The differing effects of perpendic…

Study snapshot

PublicationGuang pu xue yu guang pu fen xi = Guang pu · 2001
Study typeother
Reported directionUnclear
Evidence ratingInsufficient

Abstract

By using concept as quasi-classical particles, the particles which move in a large range of space in solid state are described. Applying the derived formula of energy uncertainty and exciton model of classical mechanics to GaAs/GaAIAs quantum well in electric field, the calculation results of exciton energy level width arc in agreement with measured results. The great different effects of perpendicular-field and parallel-field on exciton optical absorption in the quantum well can be explained clearly and simply.

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 directionunclear
PopulationNot supplied
Sample sizeNot supplied
ExposureNot supplied
Evidence strengthInsufficientConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Using a quasi-classical particle concept and derived energy-uncertainty formula applied to a GaAs/GaAlAs quantum well in an electric field, calculated exciton energy level widths were reported to agree with measured results. The differing effects of perpendicular versus parallel electric fields on exciton optical absorption in the quantum well were stated to be explainable by the model.

Outcomes measured

  • exciton energy level width
  • exciton optical absorption (perpendicular vs parallel electric field effects)

Limitations

  • No exposure parameters (field strength, frequency, duration) are provided in the abstract.
  • Study appears to be a theoretical/modeling and materials-physics application rather than a biological/health study; no health outcomes are reported.
  • No sample size or measurement details are provided in the abstract.
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "other",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "electric field",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "exciton energy level width",
    "exciton optical absorption (perpendicular vs parallel electric field effects)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Using a quasi-classical particle concept and derived energy-uncertainty formula applied to a GaAs/GaAlAs quantum well in an electric field, calculated exciton energy level widths were reported to agree with measured results. The differing effects of perpendicular versus parallel electric fields on exciton optical absorption in the quantum well were stated to be explainable by the model.",
  "effect_direction": "unclear",
  "limitations": [
    "No exposure parameters (field strength, frequency, duration) are provided in the abstract.",
    "Study appears to be a theoretical/modeling and materials-physics application rather than a biological/health study; no health outcomes are reported.",
    "No sample size or measurement details are provided in the abstract."
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "electric field",
    "quantum well",
    "GaAs/GaAlAs",
    "exciton",
    "energy level width",
    "optical absorption",
    "quasi-classical model"
  ],
  "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: Not supplied
PubMed: 12958884

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library