Abstract
We theoretically consider the spin Seebeck effect, the charge Seebeck coefficient, and the thermoelectric figure of merit in superconducting hybrid structures including either magnetic textures or intrinsic spinorbit coupling. We demonstrate that large magnitudes for all these quantities are obtainable in Josephsonbased systems with either zero or a small externally applied magnetic field. This provides an alternative to the thermoelectric effects generated in highfield (~1 T) superconducting hybrid systems, which were recently experimentally demonstrated. The systems studied contain either conical ferromagnets, spinactive interfaces, or spinorbit coupling. We present a framework for calculating the linear thermoelectric response for both spin and charge of a system upon applying temperature and voltage gradients based on quasiclassical theory which allows for arbitrary spindependent textures and fields to be conveniently incorporated.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Current device technology utilizing the electronic charge degree of freedom is rapidly approaching the limit of realizable computational power. The field of spintronics, which aims to incorporate the electron spin degree of freedom into devices with novel functionalities, has emerged as a promising alternative to siliconbased transistor technology^{1}. Among the spindependent effects already incorporated into modern device technology are the spintransfer torque (STT)^{2} and the giant magnetoresistance (GMR)^{3}, which are used for memory applications. The key quantity to control for a wider range of application areas to emerge is how long a particle remains in one spin state, as spin coherence and control are essential for efficient and reliable operation of spintronic devices. Superconducting materials have attracted great deal of attention in this respect, as superconducting order increases the electron spinflip relaxation time compared to the normal nonsuperconducting state^{4,5,6,7,8}. Moreover, hybrid systems composed of superconductors and materials with properties such as textured magnetism and spinorbit coupling contain the capability of generating spinpolarized supercurrents^{9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18}. These and related properties of superconducting systems have caused the emergence of the field known as superconducting spintronics^{19}. The superconducting order considered herein complies with the BardeenCooperSchrieffer (BCS) theory of superconductivity^{20}, where lattice vibrations cause two electrons of opposite spins to attract each other in contrast to the usual repulsive Coulomb interaction. This particle attraction causes the formation of zerospin singlet Cooper pairs, and is the cause of conventional superconductivity^{21}.
Thermoelectric effects is the common denominator for the Seebeck effect and the opposite Peltier effect^{22,23,24}, and involve the generation of charge or heat currents upon applying a temperature or voltage bias. Superconductors have traditionally been regarded as poor hosts for thermoelectric effects and incapable of efficiently converting thermal energy into electric currents and vice versa. However, over the last few years, the combination of superconductivity and magnetism has challenged this notion, after very large thermoelectric tunneling currents were predicted in superconductor/ferromagnet (S/F) hybrid structures^{25,26,27}. The prediction of thermoelectric effects comparable to those attainable in the best bulk thermoelectric semiconductors^{27} being present in S/F systems exposed to strong external magnetic fields was recently experimentally verified^{28}. Employing superconducting bilayers where both superconductors are exposed to strong external magnetic fields instead, resulting in Zeemansplit superconductors, was recently reported to further enhance these effects significantly^{29}. Electron cooling in superconducting spinfilter junctions^{30,31} and thermoelectric effects in superconducting quantum dot systems^{32} have also been studied.
The thermoelectric phenomena in question include both electronic currents generated by a temperature bias, heat currents generated by a voltage difference and pure spin currents induced by a temperature gradient applied across the device. Spin currents of this kind are not dependent on the presence of spinpolarized superconductor/ferromagnet interfaces, provided that there is a spindependent particlehole asymmetry on at least one side of the barrier interface. In the case of the S/F hybrids, this is achieved by the Zeemansplitting of the superconducting density of states induced by an external magnetic field. Comparisons to commonly known thermoelectrics can be made using the Seebeck coefficient and the thermoelectric figure of merit ZT. The thermoelectric materials currently available are capable of achieving ZT ≃ 2 and mV/K^{33}, which is rivaled by the superconducting bilayers. Consequently, thermoelectric superconducting hybrids provide a promising alternative in several lowtemperature thermoelectric application areas, such as electron refrigeration and very precise thermal sensing.
The disadvantage to using Zeemansplit superconducting hybrids for this purpose resides within the necessity of applying strong magnetic fields on the order^{28,34} of ~1 T for controllable thermoelectric effects to arise. This presents a significant challenge when considering potential application areas for superconducting thermoelectric devices. Therefore, this work will focus on expanding the study of thermoelectric superconducting hybrids to material systems where large applied magnetic fields are not needed. In the Zeemansplit S/F bilayers, the magnetic fields impose a spindependent asymmetry on the superconducting density of states, allowing the amount of particles residing in each spin state tunneling through the insulating barrier between the materials to be uneven. Spinpolarized tunneling currents and pure spin currents driven by applied voltage and temperature biases are the predicted result. The material systems studied within this work must replace the spinsplitting effect of the large external magnetic fields to enable thermoelectric phenomena. The material properties capable of imposing spinsplitting effects on the superconducting density of states studied herein include spatially varying ferromagnetism and spinorbit coupling, neither of which depend on large external fields to achieve the desired results. The effect of intrinsic spinorbit interactions has recently been shown to lead to interesting quantum transport phenomena in diffusive superconducting structures^{35,36,37,38,39,40,41}.
Similarly to ref. 42 we will consider a Josephsonbased geometry which allows for an additional control parameter in the form of the superconducting phase difference Δθ across the junction^{43,44}. Josephson junctions consist of a nonsuperconducting material placed between two superconducting reservoirs. The latter are assumed to be large when compared to the central component so that they may be treated as bulk BCS superconductors. Within this work, the central material is a semiconducting, metallic or ferromagnetic nanowire, which is separated from the superconductors via interfaces with low transparency for particle transport. Superconducting Cooper pairs may cross the tunneling barrier into the central material through a process known as the HolmMeissner or proximity effect occurring between materials grown together in good contact^{45}. Superconducting order can exist throughout the nanowire depending on the distance from the interface, magnetic order and the superconducting phase difference in the case of Josephson junctions. The inverse proximity effect is the influence of the other electronic system on the superconductor. This can affect both the superconducting critical temperature and the superconducting energy gap parameter, or induce e.g. ferromagnetic order within the superconductor^{46}. The inverse proximity effect has a negligible impact, and can be disregarded, if the superconductor is very large compared to the adjacent material and interface transparency is low^{10}. The thermoelectric phenomena considered herein depend on what is known as the triplet proximity effect, where magnetic texturing adjacent to the superconductor causes spin mixing and spin rotation of the singlet Cooper pairs, converting them into triplet Cooper pairs which can be spinpolarized.
The mathematical framework used in previous literature to predict thermoelectric effects arising in superconducting hybrids assumes collinear spin polarization, i.e. magnetic fields and materials are polarized along only one axis. When incorporating magnetic texturing and spinorbit coupling, the arbitrary orientation of the spindependent fields existing in the systems must be taken into account. Within this paper, we extend the mathematical framework to encompassing materials with arbitrary magnetic texturing. For this purpose a quasiclassical approach based on the Keldysh Green function formalism will be employed, in a similar manner as in ref. 25, but here extended from collinear magnetic alignment and including a computation of the spin Seebeck effect. The thermal generation of a spin current and an associated spin voltage is known as the spin^{47} or spindependent^{48} Seebeck effect (we will stick with the former notation in this manuscript). Within the quasiclassical approximation, only particles with energies close to the Fermi surface are assumed to contribute to transport, and the Green function matrices are nearly isotropic with respect to momentum^{49}. The second assumption is valid in highly diffusive systems where impurity scattering is dominant and extinguishes the anisotropic part of system dynamics^{50}.
Theory
The geometry considered is that of a normal metal electrode (N) coupled to a nanowire (X) connecting two superconducting reservoirs (S) and forming an S/X/S Josephson junction. The electrode and nanowire are connected via a ferromagnetic or nonpolarized insulator, as shown in the top panel of Figs 1, 2 and 3. The nanowire is either a conical ferromagnet, a normal metal with spinactive interfaces to the superconductors, or a spinorbit coupled semiconductor. The central nanowires impose the necessary spinsplitting on the superconducting density of states, causing only low or no external magnetic fields to be necessary for thermoelectric tunneling currents to arise between the electrode and the nanowire. Thermoelectric phenomena occur as a result of quasiparticle tunneling from the nanowire to the electrode, with the quasiparticles having different tunneling probabilities depending on their spin state and the polarization of the interface. The charge, heat and directiondependent spin currents across the tunneling barrier between the normal metal electrode and the central nanowire of the Josephson junction are defined by
within the quasiclassical framework, where the 8 × 8 Green function matrices are propagators for the particle and hole states and contain the information necessary for describing particle dynamics within the system. N_{0} is the Fermi level density of states, A is the interface contact area, D is the diffusion coefficient, e is the electronic charge and ħ is Planck’s reduced constant. The charge and spin currents are defined as those flowing on the right side of the junction, in the normal metal electrode, while the heat current is defined as flowing from the nanowire to the electrode. is the 4 × 4 Pauli matrix in Nambu space in each spatial direction ν = {x, y, z}, and is the Nambu space generalization of the zaligned spin space Pauli matrix. is the 2 × 2 unity matrix. E is the quasiparticle energy in relation to the Fermi level, L (R) denotes left (right) of the interface and is the 8 × 8 Green function matrix in Keldysh space^{49,50,51,52,53}:
We assume steadystate conditions in order to remove the time parameter from the equations of motion for the system, along with constant temperature and local equilibrium on each side of the junction. The chemical potential to the left of the barrier is defined as μ_{L} = 0 for reference and the chemical potential on the right as μ_{R} = eV_{R}. The Green function matrices in 4 × 4 Nambu space are expressed in terms of each other as
where is the nonequilibrium distribution function matrix
under the conditions described above. Combining Equations (3) and (4), the Keldysh Green function matrix on the left side of the barrier takes the form
where β = 1/k_{B}T. The current expressions defined in Equation 1 can be expanded using Eschrig’s boundary conditions for arbitrarily polarized interfaces defined in ref. 54:
The 8 × 8 matrix describes the polarization of the magnetic interface separating the nanowire and the normal metal electrode and is aligned along the zaxis herein. The interface parameters
describe interface resistance, barrier polarization and spindependent phase shifts occurring due to scattering at the interface. Barrier transparency is in the tunnelling limit, G_{q} = e^{2}/h is the conductance quantum, τ_{n} the interface resistance and P_{n} the polarization of transport channel n. We consider channelindependent scattering matrices where τ_{n} = τ and P_{n} = P.
Thermoelectric effects arise in the geometries considered upon application of external voltage and temperature biases. Combining Eq. (6) with Eqns. (1) allows for calculation of the thermoelectric effects after performing a Taylor expansion in voltage and temperature to linear order for each current type. The Green function matrix to the left of the interface barrier describes the superconducting correlations induced in the nanowire while represents the normal metal electrode. The Green function matrices only depend on voltage and temperature via the distribution function matrices . The resulting thermoelectric coefficients are grouped together in a 2 × 2 Onsager matrix for linear response^{55},
Thermoelectric phenomena are commonly described using the Seebeck coefficient and thermoelectric figure of merit ZT, defined by^{56,57}
The first step in computing the thermoelectric coefficients involves determining the unknown Green function matrices numerically. Herein, this is the Green function matrix within the nanowire, as we already know . The quasiclassical retarded Green function matrix on the left is determined in the middle of the central nanowire of the Josephson junction by solving the onedimensional Usadel equation^{58}
where is the selfenergy term encompassing all materialspecific properties such as magnetism and superconductivity. The subscript ‘L’ was omitted for brevity of notation. The Usadel equation (10) contains several 4 × 4 matrices and becomes cumbersome to solve for complex systems. Therefore, a Riccati parametrization^{59} is performed to express in terms of 2 × 2 matrices according to
where and . The Riccatiparametrized Usadel equation describing both normal metals, ferromagnetism and spinorbit coupling is^{36}
where h is the magnetic exchange field vector, σ the Pauli vector and A the spinorbit field vector. The conversion reduces the amount of components the Usadel equation needs to be solved for, and can diminish the computational cost.
Boundary conditions describing the superconductor/nanowire interfaces well must be used in order to compute the matrices with satisfactory accuracy. The spinactive S/N interfaces of the S/N/S Josephson junction are described by^{12,60}
where L is the length of the normal metal nanowire, ζ represents transparency at the superconductor/nanowire interfaces, , Γ is the inelastic scattering energy scale, and Δ is the superconducting energy gap. The boundary conditions valid for the conical ferromagnet and the spinorbit coupled semiconductor are the KuprianovLukichev tunneling boundary conditions^{61} modified for spinorbit coupled materials^{36}
Results
Quasiclassical thermoelectric coefficients
The theoretical results were obtained based on a Josephson junction geometry, where a normal metal electrode is coupled to the central nanowire of the junction via an insulator polarized along the zaxis. The tunneling currents defined in Eqn. 1 were Taylor expanded to linear order w.r.t. voltage and temperature yielding the Onsager matrix
The thermoelectric coefficient, conductance coefficient and thermal conductance coefficient are given by
where G_{τ} = G_{q}Nτ. The coefficients describe thermoelectric tunneling of charge and heat in superconducting hybrid systems with arbitrary spindependent magnetic textures and fields. In the limiting case of uniaxially aligned fields the expressions reduce to previous results in the literature^{27}. The coefficients can be derived without assuming a normal metal electrode. The resulting expressions are more general, but also much more complex, and are valid whenever the previously mentioned constraints upon μ_{L}, μ_{R}, and are fulfilled. See Methods for further details.
The most notable analytical result of this work is obtained upon Taylor expanding the directiondependent spin current with respect to the temperature, allowing the spin current to be expressed as when there is no applied voltage bias. Pure thermal spin currents^{27,29} are predicted to arise in each spatial direction as a direct result of tunneling through the barrier between the normal metal electrode and the central nanowire of the Josephson junction. The expressions for the thermal spin coefficients are
disappears in the quasiclassical approximation due to the restriction of charge neutrality. Accordingly, is independent of barrier polarization. This is consistent with previous observations^{27,29}. It is, however, important to note that the expressions are only valid when the quasiclassical approximation holds. The corresponding spin conductance coefficients are
which determine the voltagedriven spin current in the absence of a temperature gradient. The expressions for the thermal spin and spin conductance coefficients presented above are a new result introduced herein, and together describe the system dynamics causing the spin Seebeck effect. The thermal spin coefficients demonstrate the possibility of generating thermal spin currents polarized along different spatial directions, depending on the spindependent fields within the materials being studied. The barrier for thermoelectric tunneling is defined to be polarized along the zaxis, explaining the prefactor in front of the x and ydirectional coefficients and . When the barrier is fully polarized along the zaxis, the spin Seebeck effect is suppressed in the other two directions.
In the next two sections, the new thermoelectric coefficients will be applied to different material systems in order to theoretically quantify the resulting thermoelectric effects. The Usadel equation must first be solved numerically in the middle of the nanowire followed by numerical integration to obtain the thermoelectric coefficients. Solving the Usadel equation only at one specific point in space limits the accuracy of the calculated thermoelectric effects, but using a narrow metal electrode should remedy the problem. For all the calculations presented herein we have used L = 15 nm as the nanowire length, ζ = 4 to specify superconductor/nanowire interface transparency in the tunneling limit, Γ = 0.005Δ_{0} to represent inelastic scattering, T = 0.2T_{c,0} for the temperature, ξ = 30 nm for the superconducting coherence length and Δ_{0} = 1 meV for the superconducting energy gap. The superconducting coherence length is chosen to represent Nb with ξ_{0} = 38 nm, Δ_{0} = 1.5 meV and a superconducting critical temperature of T_{c} = 9.5 K, where the last is highest of all the elemental superconductors^{62}.
Thermoelectric figure of merit and Seebeck coefficient
The thermoelectric figure of merit ZT and Seebeck coefficient are studied for three different device scenarios. ZT and are defined in Eqn. 9 and we use the coefficients derived in Eqns. 15, 16, 17, 18. The Seebeck coefficient is maximized when the nanowire/electrode interface polarization is as large as possible. We defined the interface polarization to be P = 97%, consistent with the polarization of the ferromagnetic insulator GdN at 3 K^{63}. All three geometries studied are derived from the S/X/S Josephson junction where thermoelectric phenomena arise from tunneling between the nanowire X and a normal metal electrode. As previously mentioned, the nanowire is either a normal metal with magnetic interfaces to the superconductors, a conical ferromagnet or a semiconductor containing spinorbit coupling.
Figure 1(a) shows a graphical representation of the proposed material setup containing a conical ferromagnet as the central nanowire of the Josephson junction. The magnetic texture is spatially varying, and no external magnetic fields need be applied for thermoelectric phenomena to arise. One of the best known conical ferromagnets is the material holmium (Ho)^{64,65} below 19 K^{66}. The conical ferromagnet is described by the complete Usadel equation in Eq. 12 with a spinorbit field A = (0, 0, 0) and magnetic field vector h = (h_{x}, h_{y}, h_{z}) defined by
The materialspecific constants φ, a and θ are chosen as , θ = π/6 and a = 0.526 nm to represent Ho^{67,68}. As the magnetic exchange field in Ho has been reported to have different sizes in various experiments^{17,69,70,71}, we here consider thermoelectric response over a range of field strengths.
The Seebeck coefficient and the thermoelectric figure of merit arising due to tunneling from the conical ferromagnet are quite small, only reaching mV/K and ZT = 0.025, and are therefore not shown. This is substantially smaller than what is obtainable in Zeemansplit superconducting hybrids. The thermoelectric coefficient, on the other hand, approaches α/α_{0} = 0.1 in the best case scenario where the exchange field in the conical ferromagnet is h ~ 3Δ_{0}. This is of the same order of magnitude as the thermoelectric coefficient governing thermal charge and spin transport in Zeemansplit superconducting hybrids. The qualitative behavior of α/α_{0} is equal to that of the thermal spin coefficient along the zaxis, (Fig. 1(d)), and is not included here. The thermoelectric phenomena induced by the conical ferromagnet vary with the ferromagnetic exchange field h and the superconducting phase difference Δθ. We have defined α_{0} = G_{τ}Δ_{0}/e and α_{s,0} = G_{τ}ħΔ_{0}/e^{2}.
Figure 2(a) shows the proposed device setup for the superconducting hybrid incorporating spinactive superconductor/nanowire interfaces. The nanowire is a nonmagnetic normal metal but the S/N interfaces are occupied by thin, weakly polarized ferromagnetic insulators. These spinactive interfaces are described by Cottet’s boundary conditions (Eq. 13). The right S/N interface is aligned along the zaxis, defined by m_{R} = σ_{z}, while the alignment of the left interface can be varied in the yzplane according to m_{L} = cos(ϕ)σ_{z} + sin(ϕ)σ_{y}. The thermoelectric effects arising through tunneling from the nanowire to the electrode are presented as functions of the superconducting phase difference Δθ and the alignment angle ϕ of the left S/N interface in the yzplane. The magnetic field at this interface is aligned along the zaxis when ϕ = 0 and along the yaxis when ϕ = π/2. The remaining interface parameters for S/N tunneling are G_{MR} = 0.1 indicating weak interface polarization and G_{φ} = 0.5 or 1.05 representing spindependent phase shifts resulting from scattering at the interfaces.
The Seebeck coefficient, the thermoelectric figure of merit and the thermoelectric coefficient in the case of the spinactive Josephson junction are shown in the bottom right panel of Fig. 2. The top row (b) of the panel shows G_{φ} = 0.5, and the bottom row (c) of the panel shows G_{φ} = 1.05. The resulting thermoelectric effects rival the magnitudes obtained in the Zeemansplit superconducting bilayer from ref. 27. By selectively tuning Δθ and ϕ we can maximally obtain mV/K, ZT = 2 and α/α_{0} = −0.4. The magnetic fields necessary to reorient the magnetic S/N interfaces are much weaker than those needed to induce a strong Zeeman exchange field comparable in magnitude to the superconducting gap Δ_{0}. When G_{φ} = 0.5, the maximum thermoelectric effects are obtained when both S/N interfaces are aligned in parallel along the zaxis, as seen in Fig. 2(b). Upon increasing G_{φ} to 1.05 in Fig. 2(c), interface scattering causes a larger degree of spindependent phase shifts, moving the alignment angles maximizing the thermoelectric phenomena described by , ZT and α closer to the yaxis and ϕ = π/2.
Figure 3(a) shows the third and last scenario where a doped spinorbit coupled semiconductor constitutes the central nanowire of the Josephson junction. The primary reason for employing a semiconductor for this purpose is the possibility of a large Landé gfactor, allowing for enhanced spin response upon the application of a magnetic field^{72}. Reportedly, the Landé gfactor takes the value g ≈ 2 in superconducting Al^{73}, but can reach g ≈ 10–20 in spinorbit coupled InAs nanowires^{74,75}. The external fields needed to induce a significant particlehole asymmetry and generate thermoelectric phenomena in spinorbit coupled superconducting hybrids are therefore much smaller than the aforementioned Zeemanfield of ~1 T. Within this work we only study Rashba spinorbit coupling, and the spinorbit field is defined as A = (A_{x}, 0, 0) where
β determines the spinorbit field strength and ϕ is the field alignment angle in the yzplane. The magnetic field is applied along the zaxis, so h = (0, 0, h). Within this framework ϕ = 0 indicates field alignment along the −yaxis, ϕ = π/2 a spinorbit field along the +zaxis and ϕ = π field alignment along the +yaxis. In practice, the variation of ϕ can be achieved by either rotating the sample itself or rotating the external field as both of these procedures are fully equivalent^{76}.
The bottom right panel of Fig. 3 shows the thermoelectric effects arising in the spinorbit coupled Josephson junction geometry. They are comparable in size to the spinactive case depicted in Fig. 2, and therefore also to the high field Zeemansplit bilayers. Seebeck coefficients approaching mV/K, thermoelectric figures of merit ZT = 2 and thermoelectric coefficients α/α_{0} = 0.4 seem to be obtainable in such a configuration. The material parameters studied include an externally applied magnetic exchange field h = 0.5Δ_{0} and spinorbit coupling strengths (b) βL = 1 and (c) βL = 3. Changing the spinorbit field strength is seen to affect how the thermoelectric coefficients vary with the field alignment angle ϕ in the yzplane. When βL = 1 a large change in the field alignment has very little effect on the size of α, and ZT, while the superconducting phase difference determines whether thermoelectric phenomena exist or not. This is even more pronounced when the spinorbit field is weaker and βL = 0.1, but this is not shown herein. Δθ = π suppresses superconducting order within the nanowire, effectively preventing thermoelectric effects and causing . The maximum values of the different thermoelectric coefficients are not altered significantly as the spinorbit field strength is increased. However, increasing the spinorbit field to βL = 3 (Fig. 3(c)) makes tuning the field alignment angle correctly crucial. The underlying physical reason for this is the large anisotropy in the depairing energy penalty of the spintriplet Cooper pairs induced in the nanowire region^{36}, which is controlled via the field orientation. The maximum values for the thermoelectric coefficient α, the Seebeck coefficient and the thermoelectric figure of merit ZT are found when the spinorbit field alignment angle equals ϕ = π/2, as seen in the right panel of Fig. 3(c). At this angle, the field is aligned along the zaxis, in the same direction as the magnetic exchange field h = (0, 0, h).
Spin Seebeck effect
The spin Seebeck effect will here be studied in further detail for superconducting hybrids with magnetic texturing. Depending on the spin fields within the material systems chosen, observation of pure thermal spin currents which are independent of the interface polarization is theoretically possible. When studying the spin Seebeck effect, we consider the case of P = 0 for the tunneling barrier between the Josephson junction and the normal metal electrode. This is done in order to maximize the spin Seebeck effect along the x and yaxes as the corresponding thermal spin coefficients are proportional to . The tunneling barrier is defined to be polarized along the zaxis, causing and to diminish with increasing polarization and disappear entirely when P = 100%.
The conical S/F/S Josephson junction is the only configuration for which the thermal spin current along the xaxis is dominant. The thermal spin coefficients arising in this scenario are depicted in Fig. 1(b–d). The usual pairbreaking effect of the ferromagnetic exchange field is less pronounced when conical magnetic texturing is present, even though the conventional thermoelectric effects quantified by and ZT are rather small. The quantitative behavior of the Seebeck coefficient and thermoelectric figure of merit is directly related to the evolution and size of due to its proportionality to the thermoelectric coefficient α. The lack of significant thermally driven electric currents does, however, not prevent prominent thermal spin currents from traversing the system.
The thermal spin coefficient is vanishingly small in the last two material systems, an effect which is directly related to spindependent field alignment within the yzplane. A graphical representation of is therefore not included in this work for these systems. The thermal spin currents in the other two directions are much larger in both cases, and are shown in the bottom left panels of Figs 2 and 3.
A notable feature when considering the spinactive Josephson junction, and comparing Fig. 2(b,c), is the increase in when increasing G_{φ} from 0.55 to 1.05. Increasing spindependent phase shifts at the interface seems to force quasiparticle spins to align along the yaxis as opposed to the zaxis. The field alignment angle causing maximal thermal spin currents is also affected by changing G_{φ}, an effect which is more noticeable for even larger values of G_{φ} than depicted herein. The thermal spin currents, along with and ZT, seem to disappear as the interface field alignment angle reaches ϕ = π. At this angle the magnetic fields at the S/N interfaces are aligned in exactly opposite directions. All thermoelectric phenomena become vanishingly small in this limit. This may be understood physically from the suppression of the spintriplet Cooper pairs in this configuration as the net exchange field is averaged out in the center of the nanowire. When the triplet proximity effect vanishes, so does the spindependent particlehole asymmetry of the system.
The thermal spin coefficient along the zaxis behaves in the same manner as the thermoelectric coefficient α when the spinorbit coupled Josephson junction is considered. The maximum value of is largely unaffected upon increasing the spinorbit field strength, as can be seen when comparing Fig. 3(b,c). Increasing the spinorbit field does, however, affect how rapidly the thermal spin coefficients change when the field alignment angle is varied. The behavior of is fundamentally different, as this coefficient is sinusoidal in the field alignment angle. This sinusoidal shape is consistent as the field strength is increased, while the the quantitative change is more pronounced. In contrast to the thermal spin current generated along the axis of the magnetic exchange field, thermal requires a larger spinorbit field to reach a substantial size, in this case at least βL = 3. The Rashba coefficient β was normalized with respect to ħ^{2}/L. Depending on the electron effective mass, the normalized Rashba coupling strength βL = 3 corresponds to a Rashba coefficient β/m^{*} = 1.52 × 10^{−11} eVm when m^{*} equals the free electron mass, m_{0} = 9.11 × 10^{−31} kg. This fits quite well with for instance the experimentally determined Rashba coefficient in InAlAs/InGaAs (~0.67 × 10^{−11} eVm)^{77}. The sinusoidal behavior of seems to depend only upon the field alignment angle, with the thermal spin coefficient being positive when the spinorbit field is aligned in the +yzplane (ϕ ∈ [0.5π, π]) and negative for angles within the plane between the −y and +zaxes (ϕ ∈ [0, 0.5π]). The direction of the thermal spin current along the yaxis is thus controllable simply by altering the orientation of the weak external magnetic field.
A prominent feature occurring for all the thermoelectric coefficients studied herein is the disappearance of the thermoelectric effects as the superconducting phase difference reaches Δθ = π. Thermoelectric effects at this phase difference would indicate the existence of asymmetries in the density of states in the middle of the Josephson junction central nanowire. Superconducting order is known to be suppressed in most Josephson junctions at this phase difference. However, recent studies have emphasized the presence of such superconducting order when Δθ = π in Josephson junctions containing strong spinorbit coupling^{37}. Thermoelectric phenomena arising when Δθ = π were therefore expected to some degree, particularly in the case of the spinorbit coupled Josephson junction. The presence of such asymmetries for the specified phase difference were discovered in the density of states in several of the structures considered, but at magnitudes much too low to result in detectable thermoelectric or thermal spin currents. The presence of these asymmetries in all three spatial directions indicates the possibility of large thermoelectric effects arising even when the superconducting phase difference is Δθ = π, but for different choices of material properties and specific parameters.
The spinSeebeck coefficient was calculated in the same manner as the Seebeck coefficient. The spinSeebeck coefficient depends on spatial alignment in the same manner as the spin current, and is defined as
The unit of the spinSeebeck coefficient is once again V/K, and the coefficients are therefore directly comparable to . The maximum values of the spinSeebeck coefficients are almost equally large as the regular Seebeck coefficient in some directions. Notable spin Seebeck coefficients are V/K in the case of the spinactive Josephson junction with G_{φ} = 1.05 when P = 0 and P = 97%, and V/K for the same material system with tunneling polarization P = 97%. The spinorbit coupled Josephson junction with tunneling polarization P = 97% is capable of producing spinSeebeck coefficients V/K when βL = 1 and βL = 3. This is practically identical to for the same theoretical scenarios.
Concluding remarks
A framework for calculating thermoelectric coefficients in systems with arbitrary spindependent field alignment was derived and applied to theoretical device geometries. The results presented herein demonstrate the effect of spinactive interfaces, textured ferromagnetism and Rashba spinorbit interactions on thermoelectric phenomena in superconducting hybrids. The spindependent fields present in such materials are capable of generating large thermoelectric and spin Seebeck effects even in the absence of strong external magnetic fields. Small external fields do need to be applied to generate thermal electric and spin currents exiting the spinorbit coupled Josephson nanowires, but they should be much smaller than the ~1 T fields necessary for Zeeman splitting of the superconducting density of states considered in previous works. Thermoelectric phenomena comparable to those arising in Zeemansplit geometries were predicted, both of the conventional kind and also including pure thermal spin currents polarized in different directions.
Methods
The Onsager response matrix and quasiclassical thermoelectric coefficients presented in the main text are only valid when the electrode coupled to the nanowire is a normal metal. More general expressions were initially derived but subsequently simplified to the ones presented above. The complete thermoelectric coefficients for a random choice of materials for both the nanowire and the electrode are
and
Once again, G_{τ} = G_{q}Nτ, G_{q} = e^{2}/h is the conductance quantum, N is the number of tunneling channels and τ is the nanowire/electrode interface transparency. The thermal spin coefficient can be written as
and
The general thermoelectric coefficients rely on no assumptions regarding the nature of the materials as long as they comply with the restrictions μ_{L} = 0, μ_{R} = eV_{R}, and as defined in Eq. 4.
Additional Information
How to cite this article: Bathen, M. E. and Linder, J. Spin Seebeck effect and thermoelectric phenomena in superconducting hybrids with magnetic textures or spinorbit coupling. Sci. Rep. 7, 41409; doi: 10.1038/srep41409 (2017).
Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
Wolf, S. A. et al. Spintronics: a spinbased electronics vision for the future. Science 294, 1488–1495 (2001).
Ralph, D. C. & Stiles, M. D. Spin transfer torques. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 320, 1190–1216 (2008).
Baibich, M. N. et al. Giant magnetoresistance of (001)Fe/(001)Cr magnetic superlattices. Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2472–2475 (1988).
Yang, H., Yang, S.H., Takahashi, S., Maekawa, S. & Parkin, S. S. P. Extremely long quasiparticle spin lifetimes in superconducting aluminum using MgO tunnel spin injectors. Nature Materials 9, 586–593 (2010).
Quay, C. H. L., Chevallier, D., Bena, C. & Aprili, M. Spin imbalance and spincharge separation in a mesoscopic superconductor. Nature Physics 9, 84–88 (2013).
Hubler, F., Wolf, M. J., Beckmann, D. & Löhneysen, H. v. LongRange SpinPolarized Quasiparticle Transport in Mesoscopic Al Superconductors with a Zeeman Splitting. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 207001 (2012).
Yamashita, Y., Takahashi, S., Imamura, H. & Maekawa, S. Spin transport and relaxation in superconductors. Phys. Rev. B 65, 172509 (2002).
Bobkova, I. V. & Bobkov, A. M. Longrange spin imbalance in mesoscopic superconductors under a Zeeman splitting. Pis’ma v ZhETF 101, 124 (2015).
Eschrig, M. Spinpolarized supercurrents for spintronics: a review of current progress. Rep. Prog. Phys. 78, 104501 (2015).
Bergeret, F. S., Volkov, A. F. & Efetov, K. B. Odd triplet superconductivity and related phenomena in superconductorferromagnet structures. Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 1321–1373 (2005).
Keizer, R. S. et al. A spintriplet supercurrent through halfmetallic ferromagnet CrO2 . Nature 439, 825–827 (2006).
Gomperud, I. & Linder, J. Spin supercurrent and phasetunable triplet Cooper pairs via magnetic insulators. Phys. Rev. B 92, 035416 (2015).
Moor, A., Volkov, A. F. & Efetov, K. B. Nematic versus ferromagnetic spin filtering of triplet Cooper pairs in superconducting spintronics. Phys. Rev. B 92, 180506(R) (2015).
Asano, Y., Sawa, Y., Tanaka, Y. & Golubov, A. A. Oddfrequency pairs and Josephson current through a strong ferromagnet. Phys. Rev. B 76, 224525 (2007).
Houzet, M. & Buzdin, A. I. Long range triplet Josephson effect through a ferromagnetic trilayer. Phys. Rev. B 76, 060504(R) (2007).
Khaire, T. S. et al. Observation of SpinTriplet Superconductivity in CoBased Josephson Junctions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 137002 (2010).
Robinson, J. W. A., Witt, J. D. S. & Blamire, M. G. Controlled Injection of SpinTriplet Supercurrents into a Strong Ferromagnet. Science 329, 59–61 (2010).
Halterman, K., Valls, O. T. & Wu, C.T. Charge and spin currents in ferromagnetic Josephson junctions. Phys. Rev. B 92, 174516 (2015).
Linder, J. & Robinson, J. W. A. Superconducting spintronics. Nat. Phys. 11, 307–315 (2015).
Bardeen, J., Cooper, L. N. & Schrieffer, J. R. Theory of Superconductivity. Phys. Rev. 108, 1175–1204 (1957).
Cooper, L. N. Bound Electron Pairs in a Degenerate Fermi Gas. Phys. Rev. 104, 1189–1190 (1956).
Seebeck, T. J. Magnetische Polarisation der Metalle und Erze durch TemperaturDifferenz (Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1825).
Seebeck, T. J. Ueber die Magnetische Polarisation der Metalle und Erze durch TemperaturDifferenz. Annalen der Physik 82, 133–160 (1826).
Peltier, J. C. A. Nouvelles experiences sur la caloricite des courants electrique. Ann. Chim. Phys. 56, 371–386 (1834).
Machon, P., Eschrig, M. & Belzig, W. Nonlocal Thermoelectric Effects and Nonlocal Onsager relations in a ThreeTerminal ProximityCoupled SuperconductorFerromagnet Device. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 047002 (2013).
Kalenkov, M. S., Zaikin, A. D. & Kuzmin, L. S. Theory of a Large Thermoelectric Effect in Superconductors Doped with Magnetic Impurities. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 147004 (2012).
Ozaeta, A., Virtanen, P., Bergeret, F. S. & Heikkilä, T. T. Predicted Very Large Thermoelectric Effect in FerromagnetSuperconductor Junctions in the Presence of a SpinSplitting Magnetic Field. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 057001 (2014).
Kolenda, S., Wolf, M. J. & Beckmann, D. Observation of thermoelectric currents in highfield superconductorferromagnet tunnel junctions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 097001 (2016).
Linder, J. & Bathen, M. E. Spin caloritronics with superconductors: Enhanced thermoelectric effects, generalized Onsager responsematrix, and thermal spin currents. Phys. Rev. B 93, 224509 (2016).
Kawabata, S. et al. Efficient electron refrigeration using superconductor/spinfilter devices. Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 032602 (2013).
Kawabata, S. et al. Heat transport and electron cooling in ballistic normalmetal/spinfilter/superconductor junctions. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 383, 157–161 (2015).
Hwang, S.Y., Lopez, R. & Sanchez, D. Large thermoelectric power and figure of merit in a ferromagneticquantum dotsuperconducting device. Phys. Rev. B 94, 054506 (2016).
Snyder, G. J. & Toberer, E. S. Complex Thermoelectric Materials. Nature Materials 7, 105–114 (2008).
Tedrow, P. M. & Meservey, R. Direct Observation of SpinState Mixing in Superconductors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 27, 919–921 (1971).
Bergeret, F. S. & Tokatly, I. V. Spinorbit coupling as a source of longrange triplet proximity effect in superconductorferromagnet hybrid structures. Phys. Rev. B 89, 134517 (2014).
Jacobsen, S. H., Ouassou, J. A. & Linder, J. Critical temperature and tunneling spectroscopy of superconductorferromagnet hybrids with intrinsic RashbaDresselhaus spinorbit coupling. Phys. Rev. B 92, 024510 (2015).
Jacobsen, S. H. & Linder, J. Giant triplet proximity effect in pibiased Josephson junctions with spinorbit coupling. Phys. Rev. B 92, 024501 (2015).
Houzet, M. & Meyer, J. Quasiclassical theory of disordered Rashba superconductors. Phys. Rev. B 92, 014509 (2015).
Konschelle, F., Tokatly, I. V. & Bergeret, F. S. Theory of the spingalvanic effect and the anomalous phase shift ϕ0 in superconductors and Josephson junctions with intrinsic spinorbit coupling. Phys. Rev. B 92, 125443 (2015).
Ouassou, J. A., Di Bernardo, A., Robinson, J. W. A. & Linder, J. Electric control of superconducting transition through a spinorbit coupled interface. Sci. Rep. 6, 29312 (2016).
Bobkova, I. V. & Bobkov, A. M. Quasiclassical theory of magnetoelectric effects in superconducting heterostructures in the presence of the spinorbit coupling. arXiv:1611.01737.
Giazotto, F., Robinson, J. W. A., Moodera, J. S. & Bergeret, F. S. Proposal for a phasecoherent thermoelectric transistor. Appl. Phys. Lett. 105, 062602 (2014).
Josephson, B. D. Possible new effects in superconductive tunneling. Phys. Lett. 1, 251–253 (1962).
Josephson, B. D. The discovery of tunneling supercurrents. Rev. Mod. Phys. 46, 251–254 (1974).
Holm, R. & Meissner, W. Messungen mit Hilfe von flüssigem Helium. XIII. Zeitschrift für Physik 74, 715–735 (1932).
Xia, J., Shelukhin, V., Karpovski, M., Kapitulnik, A. & Palevski, A. Inverse Proximity Effect in SuperconductorFerromagnet Bilayer Structures. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 087004 (2009).
Uchida, K. et al. Observation of the spin Seebeck effect. Nature 455, 778–781 (2008).
Fu, H.H., Wu, D.D., Zhang, Z.Q. & Gu, L. Spindependent Seebeck Effect, Thermal Colossal Magnetoresistance and Negative Differential Thermoelectric Resistance in Zigzag Silicene Nanoribbon Heterojunciton. Scientific Reports 5, 10547 (2015).
Rammer, J. & Smith, H. Quantum fieldtheoretical methods in transport theory of metals. Rev. Mod. Phys. 58, 323–359 (1986).
Belzig, W., Wilhelm, F. K., Bruder, C., Schön, G. & Zaikin, A. D. Quasiclassical Green’s function approach to mesoscopic superconductivity. Superlattices and Microstructures 25, 1251–1288 (1999).
Keldysh, L. V. Diagram technique for nonequilibrium processes. Soviet Physics JETP 20, 1018–1026 (1965).
Larkin, A. I. & Ovchinnikov, Y. N. Nonlinear conductivity of superconductors in the mixed state. Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 68, 1915–1927 (1975).
Chandrasekhar, V. An introduction to the quasiclassical theory of superconductivity for diffusive proximitycoupled systems. (Online, 2008) http://arxiv.org/pdf/condmat/0312507v2.pdf.
Eschrig, M., Cottet, A., Belzig, W. & Linder, J. General boundary conditions for quasiclassical theory of superconductivity in the diffusive limit: application to strongly spinpolarized systems. N. J. Phys. 17, 083037 (2015).
Onsager, L. Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes. I. Physical Review 37, 405–426 (1931).
Kasap, S. Thermoelectric Effects in Metals: Thermocouples (University of Saskatchewan, Online eBooklet, 2001). http://www.kasap.usask.ca/samples/ThermoelectricSeebeck.pdf.
Littman, H. & Davidson, B. Theoretical bound on the thermoelectric figure of merit from irreversible thermodynamics. J. Appl. Phys. 32, 217–219 (1961).
Usadel, K. D. Generalized Diffusion Equation for Superconducting Alloys. Phys. Rev. Lett. 25, 507 (1970).
Schopohl, N. Transformation of the Eilenberger equations of superconductivity to a scalar Riccati equation (Online preprint, 1998) https://arxiv.org/pdf/condmat/9804064v1.pdf.
Cottet, A., HuertasHernando, D., Belzig, W. & Nazarov, Y. V. Spindependent boundary conditions for isotropic superconducting Green’s functions. Phys. Rev. B 80, 184511 (2009).
Kuprianov, M. Y. & Lukichev, V. F. Influence of boundary transparency on the critical current of dirty SS’S superconductors. Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz 94, 139–149 (1988).
Kittel, C. Introduction to Solid State Physics (Wiley, 8th edition, 2005).
Pal, A. & Blamire, M. G. Large interfacial exchange fields in a thick superconducting film coupled to a spinfilter tunnel barrier. Phys. Rev. B 92, 180510(R) (2015).
Jensen, J. Theory of commensurable magnetic structures in holmium. Phys. Rev. B 54, 4021–4032 (1996).
Pechan, M. J. & Stassis, C. Magnetic structure of holmium. J. Appl. Phys. 55, 1900–1902 (1984).
Chiodi, F. et al. Supraoscillatory critical temperature dependence of NbHo bilayers. Europhysics Letters 101, 37002 (2013).
Sosnin, I., Cho, H., Petrashov, V. T. & Volkov, A. F. Superconducting Phase Coherent Electron Transport in Proximity Conical Ferromagnets. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 157002 (2006).
Linder, J., Yokoyama, T. & Sudbø, A. Theory of superconducting and magnetic proximity effect in S/F structures with inhomogeneous magnetization textures and spinactive interfaces. Phys. Rev. B 79, 054523 (2009).
Gu, Y., Halasz, G. B., Robinson, J. W. A. & Blamire, M. G. Large Superconducting Spin Valve Effect and Ultrasmall Exchange Splitting in Epitaxial RareEarthNiobium Trilayers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 067201 (2015).
Di Bernardo, A. et al. Intrinsic Paramagnetic Meissner Effect Due to sWave OddFrequency Superconductivity. Phys. Rev. X 5, 041021 (2015).
Di Bernardo, A. et al. Signature of magneticdependent gapless odd frequency states at superconductor/ferromagnet interfaces. Nature Communications 6, 8053 (2015).
Pryor, C. E. & Flatte, M. E. Lande g Factors and Orbital Momentum Quenching in Semiconductor Quantum Dots. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 026804 (2006).
Quay, C. H. L., Weideneder, M., Chiffaudel, Y., Strunk, C. & Aprili, M. Quasiparticle spin resonance and coherence in superconducting aluminium. Nature Communications 6, 8660 (2015).
NadjPerge, S., Frolov, S. M., Bakkers, E. P. A. M. & Kouwenhoven, L. P. Spinorbit qubit in a semiconductor nanowire. Nature 468, 1084–1087 (2010).
Winkler, R. SpinOrbit Coupling Effects in TwoDimensional Electron and Hole Systems (Springer, Berlin, 2003).
Espedal, C., Yokoyama, T. & Linder, J. Anisotropic Paramagnetic Meissner Effect by SpinOrbit Coupling. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 127002 (2016).
Nitta, J., Akazaki, T., Takayanagi, H. & Enoki, T. Gate Control of SpinOrbit Interaction in an Inverted InGaAs/InAlAs Hetrostructure. Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1335 (1997).
Acknowledgements
J.L. acknowledges support from the Outstanding Academic Fellows programme at NTNU and the Norwegian Research Council Grant No. 216700 and No. 240806.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
M.E.B. performed the analytical and numerical calculations with minor support from J.L. Both authors contributed to the writing and discussion of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
About this article
Cite this article
Bathen, M., Linder, J. Spin Seebeck effect and thermoelectric phenomena in superconducting hybrids with magnetic textures or spinorbit coupling. Sci Rep 7, 41409 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41409
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41409
This article is cited by

PhotonSelective SpinDependent Transport Through a Quantum Dot Driven by Electrical and Thermal Biases
International Journal of Theoretical Physics (2018)

Oscillatory Nernst effect in Ptferritecupratesuperconductor trilayer films
Scientific Reports (2017)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.