Statistical Structure of Charge Disorder in Si/SiGe Quantum Dots

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.13578
• Title: Statistical Structure of Charge Disorder in Si/SiGe Quantum Dots
• Authors: Saeed Samadi, Łukasz Cywiński, Jan A. Krzywda
• Classification: cond-mat.mes-hall, quant-ph
• Publication Date: October 15, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.13578

Abstract

This study systematically analyzes the effects of charge disorder on device-to-device variability in spin qubit devices based on Si/SiGe quantum dots. Through finite element modeling to generate extensive statistical samples, the research reveals that parameter variations are not random but concentrated along several principal directions. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) identifies three dominant disorder modes and establishes predictive statistical models. The study reveals the limitations of gate-control schemes using only plunger gates and provides a framework for improving controllability and operational yield of spin qubit devices.

Research Background and Motivation

Core Problem

Si/SiGe quantum dot spin qubit devices exhibit significant device-to-device variability, primarily caused by inevitable disorder in semiconductor nanostructures. Among these, charge disorder at the semiconductor-oxide interface represents an important source of variability.

Problem Significance

1. Scalability Challenge in Quantum Computing: Device variability complicates tuning of multi-qubit systems, making manual tuning unmanageable as the number of qubits N increases
2. Industrial Manufacturing Requirements: The long-term advantage of Si/SiGe quantum dots lies in utilizing industrial fabrication techniques to create chips containing millions of qubits, but variability issues must be resolved
3. Training Automated Tuning Algorithms: Machine learning algorithms require training on simulated device response data with realistic disorder

Limitations of Existing Approaches

• Lack of systematic understanding of parameter correlations induced by disorder
• Existing gate-control schemes (particularly those using only plunger gates) have fundamental limitations in compensating certain types of disorder
• Absence of predictive statistical models capable of generating realistic training data

Core Contributions

1. Established Predictive Statistical Models: Based on finite element modeling and multivariate Gaussian distributions, capable of generating realistic synthetic data for training machine learning algorithms
2. Identified Three Principal Disorder Modes: PCA analysis reveals that over 90% of parameter variability concentrates along three principal directions
3. Quantified Control Scheme Limitations: Systematic comparison of 2-gate and 3-gate control schemes reveals that plunger-gate-only control explains only ~50% of disorder variability
4. Provided Physical Interpretation Framework: Links statistical patterns to specific physical mechanisms (e.g., inter-dot charge distribution)
5. Established PCA Analysis Paradigm: Establishes PCA as a powerful framework for analyzing multivariate data in quantum dot control

Detailed Methodology

Task Definition

Study the statistical effects of charge disorder on Si/SiGe double quantum dot (DQD) parameters, including:

• Input: Interface trap charge density ρ and spatial distribution
• Output: DQD parameter vector X = d, tc, Lx, ΔLx, Fz, ΔFz, εᵀ
• Constraints: Device must satisfy functional requirements (orbital energy > 1 meV, tunnel coupling 10-250 μeV, etc.)

Model Architecture

1. Device Modeling

Finite element modeling using COMSOL Multiphysics:

• Structural Parameters: Si quantum well thickness hSi = 10 nm, device dimensions 660×582 nm²
• Material Parameters: Si₀.₇Ge₀.₃ barriers, conduction band offset U₀ = 150 meV
• Gate Configuration: Two plunger gates (VL, VR) and one barrier gate (VB)

2. Statistical Modeling

Parameter vector modeled as multivariate normal distribution:

P(X) = 1/√((2π)^k|Σ|) exp(-1/2(X-μ)^T Σ^(-1)(X-μ))

where μ is the mean vector and Σ is the covariance matrix.

3. Principal Component Analysis

Eigenvalue decomposition of dimensionless correlation matrix:

Cij = Σij/√(ΣiiΣjj)

Solve eigenvalue problem Cdᵢ = λᵢdᵢ to obtain principal components dᵢ and corresponding variances λᵢ.

Technical Innovations

1. Multi-scale Modeling Approach: Combines macroscopic finite element modeling with microscopic quantum mechanical calculations
2. Statistical-Physical Correspondence: Maps PCA modes to specific charge distribution physical mechanisms
3. Control Space Analysis: Innovatively applies PCA to quantify gate control capabilities
4. Predictive Model Validation: Validates model accuracy through comparison of synthetic and original data

Experimental Setup

Dataset

• Charge Density Range: ρ = 5×10⁹ to 5×10¹⁰ cm⁻²
• Sample Scale: Extensive statistical samples generated for each density
• Parameter Space: 7-dimensional parameter vector including tunnel coupling, inter-dot distance, barrier height and other critical parameters

Evaluation Metrics

1. Device Yield: Percentage of devices meeting functional requirements
2. Parameter Variation Coefficient: σ/|μ| quantifies relative variability
3. Controllability Index: ηK = proportion of disorder variance explained by control modes
4. Reconstruction Quality: R² coefficient measures controllability of disorder modes

Comparison Schemes

• 2-gate Control: Using only plunger gates (VL, VR)
• 3-gate Control: Complete control including barrier gate (VB)
• Ideal Device: Reference case without charge disorder

Experimental Results

Main Results

1. Device Yield Analysis

• ρ = 5×10⁹ cm⁻²: Yield ~72%
• ρ = 1×10¹⁰ cm⁻²: Yield drops to 48%
• ρ = 5×10¹⁰ cm⁻²: Yield further drops to 20%

2. Parameter Variability Statistics

Tunnel coupling tc exhibits strongest non-Gaussian characteristics:

• Low density (ρ₁): μ = 60.96 μeV, σ = 31.70 μeV, CV = 0.52
• High density (ρ₂): μ = 87.01 μeV, σ = 53.33 μeV, CV = 0.60

3. PCA Analysis Results

First three principal components explain >90% of total variance:

• PC1 (~50% variance): d and tc anti-correlated, positive contributions from Lx and Fz
• PC2 (~25% variance): Primarily dominated by ε and ΔFz
• PC3 (~15% variance): Almost entirely composed of Fz

Control Capability Quantification

• 3-gate Control: Explains >90% of disorder variance
• 2-gate Control: Explains only ~50% of disorder variance
• Critical Limitation: 2-gate control achieves R² = 0.30 for PC1 (most important mode), while 3-gate control reaches 1.00

Physical Mechanism Explanation

1. Symmetric Compression/Extension Mode (PC1): Inter-dot negative charge causes increased dot separation and reduced tc
2. Asymmetric Tilt Mode (PC2): Charge biased toward one dot causes detuning
3. Common-Mode Shift Mode (PC3): Affects average vertical electric field, important for valley splitting

Related Work

Quantum Dot Disorder Research

• Electrostatic Disorder: Klos et al.'s tunnel coupling calculations, Martinez et al.'s gate layout optimization
• Atomic Disorder: Interface roughness and alloy disorder effects on valley splitting
• Strain Effects: Non-uniform strain contributions to device variability

Machine Learning Applications in Quantum Dot Control

• Automated Tuning: Zwolak et al.'s automated tuning for double-dot devices
• PCA Applications: Primarily limited to signal preprocessing; this work first applies PCA to physical interpretation and control analysis

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Structured Variability: Parameter changes induced by charge disorder are highly structured, concentrated in few modes
2. Strong Correlations: Strong anti-correlation between tc and d enables direct probing of inter-dot distance through tc measurement
3. Control Limitations: Plunger-gate-only control cannot effectively compensate principal disorder modes
4. Predictive Capability: Multivariate Gaussian model accurately generates realistic synthetic training data

Limitations

1. Electrostatic Disorder Scope: Does not account for atomic disorder and valley coupling randomness at Si/SiGe interface
2. Model Assumptions: Multivariate normal distribution assumption imperfectly fits non-Gaussian characteristics of some parameters (e.g., tc)
3. Device Specificity: Results primarily applicable to specific Si/SiGe structural parameters

Future Directions

1. Multi-physics Coupling: Combine electrostatic disorder with atomic-level interface disorder
2. Nonlinear Control: Explore nonlinear control manifolds to improve 2-gate control effectiveness
3. Cross-device Crosstalk: Exploit crosstalk effects from adjacent gates to enhance control capability
4. Experimental Validation: Verify statistical predictions on actual device arrays

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Methodological Innovation: First systematic application of PCA to quantum dot disorder analysis, establishing new analytical paradigm
2. Deep Physical Insight: Successfully correlates statistical patterns with specific physical mechanisms, providing clear physical picture
3. High Practical Value: Predictive model directly applicable to training automated tuning algorithms, addressing practical engineering challenges
4. Comprehensive Analysis: Multi-level analysis from device yield to control capability, covering critical aspects of practical applications

Weaknesses

1. Model Simplification: Neglects important effects such as valley physics, potentially underestimating actual variability
2. Parameter Range: Considers only specific charge density and device parameter ranges
3. Missing Experimental Validation: Lacks direct comparison with actual device measurement data
4. Dynamic Effects: Does not account for time-dependent charge noise and environmental fluctuations

Impact

1. Theoretical Contribution: Establishes systematic statistical analysis framework for quantum dot device variability research
2. Technical Application: Provides important guidance for device control in scalable quantum computing
3. Method Generalization: PCA analysis method generalizable to other quantum device platforms
4. Industrial Significance: Important reference value for industrial manufacturing of semiconductor quantum devices

Applicable Scenarios

1. Quantum Computing R&D: Design and optimization of large-scale qubit arrays
2. Automated Control: Training data generation for machine learning tuning algorithms
3. Device Design: Variability prediction and optimization for novel quantum dot structures
4. Manufacturing Process: Assessment of semiconductor process impacts on device performance

References

The paper contains 65 references covering important works in Si/SiGe quantum dots, spin qubits, machine learning control and related fields, providing solid theoretical foundation for the research.

Overall Assessment: This is an important work in quantum computing device physics. By innovatively applying statistical analysis methods to quantum device variability research, it not only provides profound physical insights but also establishes practical predictive frameworks. Despite certain model simplification limitations, its methodological contributions and practical application value make it an important advance in the field.