turbulent aerosols are of interest in a variety of natural and technological systems .
two very important examples are water droplets in turbulent rain clouds @xcite and dust grains in turbulent accretion disks around growing stars @xcite . in both of these systems
the aerosol is unstable because the suspended particles collide ( leading to aggregation or possibly fragmentation of the aerosol particles ) .
the collision processes therefore have significant consequences : the formation of rain in one case , and the widely hypothesised mechanism for the formation of planets in the other .
collisions always occur due to molecular diffusion , but ( as pointed out by smoluchowski @xcite ) , macroscopic fluid motion can considerably increase the collision rate .    if the suspended particles are sufficiently heavy ( so that their inertia becomes relevant ) , they can move relative to the fluid . in this case the occurrence of caustics will typically increase the collision rate by several orders of magnitude @xcite . if the aerosol particles are sufficiently light , their molecular diffusion can make a significant contribution to the collision rate , which can be estimated by standard kinetic theory .
in this paper we are concerned with the effect of macroscopic motion of a fluid on small particles which have insignificant inertia , so that they follow the flow ( advective motion ) .
the seminal papers in this area were due to smoluchowski @xcite , who first considered the effect of shear of the fluid flow on collisions , and saffman & turner @xcite , who gave a formula for the collision rate which has formed the basis for most subsequent work on this problem .
their paper was motivated by a problem in meteorology argued that small - scale turbulence in convecting clouds can accelerate collisions between microscopic water droplets , thus initiating rain formation : in this case the particles are brought into contact by hyperbolic or shearing motions of the turbulent flow .    the formula for the collision rate by saffman & turner @xcite has been used frequently in the past five decades in cloud physics and in chemical engineering problems .
it appears to be widely accepted that their expression is an exact relation for the collision rate in a dilute suspension . in the following
we show that the saffman - turner estimate describes an initial transient of the problem only . for particles suspended in incompressible flows
, the collision rate falls below the initial transient ( which thus constitutes an upper bound ) . for particles advected in a compressible flows , however ,
homogeneously distributed particles will cluster in a compressible fluid ( see for example @xcite ) .
the clustering may increase the collision rate beyond its initial transient .
the saffman - turner approximation treats the flow surrounding a test particle as if it were a steady hyperbolic flow , while in reality the flow fluctuates as a function of time . in section [ sec
: 3.2 ] below we give an extension of the saffman - turner formula which does give the collision rate exactly .
unfortunately the formula contains information about the time - dependence of the flow , and it is impossible to evaluate it in the general case .    because of the importance of understanding collision rates for aerosol particles , it is desirable to find exactly solvable cases which can be used as a benchmark for numerical studies . the collision rate must depend on a dimensionless parameter describing how quickly the fluid velocity fluctuates , the kubo number @xcite .
we are able to obtain precise asymptotic results on the collision rate in the limit where the kubo number approaches zero . in this case ,
particle separations undergo a diffusion process . by solving the corresponding fokker - planck equation we can determine the collision rate exactly .
the remainder of this paper is organised as follows . in section [ sec : 2 ] we introduce the equations of motion and the dimensionless parameters of the problem .
section [ sec : 3 ] discusses the saffman - turner theory and our extension of it . section [ sec : 3.1 ] describes the expression for the collision rate given in @xcite which is the starting point of our discussions . ( some new results on the evaluation of the saffman - turner expression are described in the appendix ) . in section [ sec : 3.2 ] we discuss our exact formula for the collision rate , and explain why the saffman - turner approximation describes an initial transient only . in sections [ sec : 4]-[sec : 6 ]
we discuss how exact asymptotic results may be found for the limit of small kubo number .
a fokker - planck equation for the probability density of the separation of particles is described in section [ sec : 4 ] . in section [ sec : 5 ] this is used to obtain the steady - state collision rate and section [ sec : 6 ] gives the full time dependence of the collision rate .
these results are compared to numerical simulations in section [ sec : 7 ] , which also contains some concluding remarks , discussing scope for further work in this area .
finally , we remark that a brief summary of some of the results of this paper has already been published @xcite . here
we discuss the problem in greater depth and generality , and derive expressions for the time - dependent collision rate which were not discussed in @xcite .
we consider spherical particles of radius @xmath0 in a fluid with velocity field @xmath1 which has an apparently random motion , usually as a result of turbulence .
we assume that the suspended particles do not modify the surrounding flow .
when the inertia of the particles is negligible , they are advected by the flow : @xmath2 it is assumed that direct interactions between the particles can be neglected until they collide . in other words ,
the particles follow equation ( [ eq : 2.1 ] ) until their separation falls below @xmath3 .
we model the complex flow of a turbulent fluid by a random velocity field @xmath4 .
we consider flows in both two and three spatial dimensions and for convenience we use a gaussian distributed field when we carry through concrete computations . in most cases we are concerned with incompressible flow , satisfying @xmath5 .
particles floating on the surface of a fluid may experience a partly compressible flow @xcite , as may particles in gases moving with speeds comparable to the speed of sound .
for these reasons we also consider partially compressible flows .
it is convenient to construct the random velocity field @xmath1 from scalar stream functions or potentials @xcite . in two spatial dimensions
we write @xmath6 where @xmath7 is a normalisation factor and @xmath8 and @xmath9 are independent gaussian random functions .
we shall use angle brackets to denote averaging throughout .
the fields @xmath10 and @xmath11 have zero averages , @xmath12 , @xmath13 and they both have same correlation function , @xmath14 : @xmath15 where @xmath16 and @xmath17 .
this two - point correlation function @xmath14 is a smooth function decaying ( sufficiently rapidly ) to zero for large values of @xmath18 and @xmath19 . for @xmath20 ,
the flow ( [ eq : 2.2 ] ) is incompressible . for finite values of @xmath21
it acquires a compressible component . in the limit of @xmath22
the flow is purely potential . in some cases
the physics of a problem dictates that @xmath8 and @xmath9 should have different correlation functions ; many of our results can be generalised in this way .
in three spatial dimensions we write @xmath23 where @xmath24 and @xmath9 are four independent scalar fields with zero mean and with the same correlation function @xmath14 ; and @xmath25 is a normalisation factor .    in the remainder of this paper
we choose the normalisation factors to be of the form @xmath26 where @xmath27 is the standard deviation of the magnitude of the velocity and @xmath28 denotes the second derivative of the correlation function ( [ eq : 2.3 ] ) with respect to its first argument .
fully - developed turbulent flows have a power - law spectrum in the inertial range , covering a wide band of wavenumbers @xcite .
this feature can be incorporated by giving @xmath14 a suitable algebraic behaviour over a range of values of @xmath18 , as explained in @xcite .
the long - ranged behaviour of the velocity field is not , however , relevant to the advective collision mechanism .
it therefore suffices to consider a model with a short - ranged velocity correlation : for the numerical work reported in this paper we used following form of the correlation function @xmath29 where @xmath30 is a constant . in our numerical simulations
we represent the flow field by its fourier components which are subject to an ornstein - uhlenbeck process as suggested by sigurgeirson & stuart @xcite .
lc + & + particle size & @xmath0 + typical velocity fluctuation & @xmath27 + correlation length of the flow & @xmath31 + correlation time of the flow & @xmath32 + number density of particles & @xmath33 + compressibility & @xmath21 + spatial dimension & @xmath34 +   +    our problem is characterised by the six parameters listed in table [ tab:1 ] . from the parameters in table
[ tab:1 ] , three independent dimensionless combinations can be formed : @xmath35 the first parameter characterises the dimensionless speed of the flow and is called kubo number , discussed in @xcite .
note that @xmath36 is not possible , because the motion of the fluid places an upper limit on the correlation time .
steady , fully developed turbulence corresponds to @xmath37 .
the kubo number can be small for randomly stirred fluids .
it is only in the limit @xmath38 that we are able to obtain precise and explicit estimates for the collision rate : this case is considered in sections [ sec : 4]-[sec : 6 ] . the second parameter in ( [ eq : 2.7 ] ) is the packing fraction of particles .
throughout we assume that this parameter is small .
similarly , the third parameter in ( [ eq : 2.7 ] ) is usually taken to be small .
we note that kalda @xcite has considered the collision rate for particles in a non - smooth velocity field : this could be relevant to the case where @xmath39 .
throughout this paper we consider the rate of collision of a given particle with any other particle , denoting this by @xmath40 .
some papers consider the total rate of collision per unit volume . if the spatial density of particles is @xmath33 , the total rate of collision per unit volume is @xmath41 ( the factor of @xmath42 avoids double - counting ) .
we will not be concerned with what happens after particles undergo their first collision : in different physical circumstances they may coalesce , scatter , or fragment , but in this paper we are concerned only with their first contact .
we assume that the particles are spherical ( or circular , in two - dimensional calculations ) and that they all have the same radius , @xmath0 .
we regard the particles as having collided when their separation reaches @xmath3 , and we neglect effects due to the interaction of the particles and the fluid . in practice
the fluid trapped between approaching particles may slightly reduce the collision rate @xcite , but this effect can be accounted for by replacing the radius by an effective radius .
the problem of calculating the rate of collision therefore reduces to the following problem .
we consider a given particle , and transform to a frame where the centre of this particle is at the origin , and the separation of the centre of another particle is denoted by @xmath43 .
initially , the reference particle is surrounded by a gas of particles with spatial density @xmath33 .
we assume that these are initially randomly distributed , apart from the constraint that none of the particles is in contact with the reference particle .
collisions with the test particle occur when other particles come within a radius @xmath3 of the reference particle .
the rate of collisions is therefore the rate at which particles cross a sphere of radius @xmath3 centred at the origin in the relative coordinate system .
this is obtained by integrating the inward radial velocity over the sphere , and multiplying by the density @xmath33 .
this approach gives an expression for the collision rate which we term @xmath44 : @xmath45 where @xmath46 is the radial velocity at spherical coordinate @xmath47 , radius @xmath18 and time @xmath48 .
the function @xmath49 is a heaviside step function , which is used to select regions of the surface where the flow is into the sphere of radius @xmath3 .
this is the fundamental expression for the collision rate given by saffman & turner @xcite . in section [ sec
: 3.2 ] we discuss why this expression is not exact , and give the precise formula .
the remainder of this section considers how this expression is evaluated ; some new results are presented in the appendix .
the evaluation of ( [ eq : 3.1 ] ) is greatly simplified in the case where the particles are small , in the sense that @xmath50 . in this case
the relative velocity is accurately approximated using the velocity gradient of the random velocity field @xmath51 .
this approximation was also considered by saffman & turner @xcite .
to lowest order in @xmath52 , the relative velocity @xmath53 is approximated as @xmath54 where @xmath55 is the rate of strain matrix of the flow @xmath56 , with elements @xmath57 ( and @xmath58 ) .
two particles with radii @xmath59 moving close to each other will thus experience a relative velocity @xmath60 .
this is illustrated in figure [ fig : 1 ] for a flow which is hyperbolic in the vicinity of the reference particle .
the corresponding relative radial speed @xmath61 is @xmath62 where @xmath63 is the radial unit vector . in particular , at the distance @xmath64 where particles collide , the radial speed is @xmath65 .
thus when @xmath50 , equation ( [ eq : 3.1 ] ) reduces to @xmath66 this expression was also obtained in @xcite .
the remainder of this subsection is concerned with the evaluation of ( [ eq : 3.2 ] ) .
schematic picture of two particles of radius @xmath0 passing each other in a hyperbolic flow .
the particle at the origin will see particles move past on hyperbolic trajectories .
collisions occur whenever particles approach closer than @xmath3 .
the collision rate is thus determined by the influx of particles into a disc of radius @xmath3 ( dashed line ) around the origin.,width=226 ]    earlier , smoluchowski @xcite had considered the special case of a fluid flowing with a uniform shear in @xmath67 dimensions : @xmath68 he obtained the collision rate : @xmath69 which is in agreement with the result of evaluating ( [ eq : 3.2 ] ) for this case . for a general strain - rate matrix @xmath70 the evaluation of ( [ eq : 3.2 ] ) is , however , very difficult . in [ sec : appa ]
we discuss how this expression is evaluated for a general matrix @xmath71 in two dimensions , and for a general traceless matrix ( representing an incompressible flow ) in three dimensions .    in a turbulent flow , saffman &
turner @xcite argued that the elements of @xmath71 change as a function of position and one needs to average over the ensemble of strain matrices @xmath70 at different positions in order to estimate the collision rate , so that ( [ eq : 3.2 ] ) is replaced by : @xmath72 at first sight the requirement to average over @xmath71 appears to complicate the problem .
however , for a rotationally invariant ensemble of random flows , the problem is considerably simplified by taking the average . in an incompressible flow , for each realisation of @xmath1 , the currents into and out of the collision region ( the disk or sphere of radius @xmath3 ) cancel precisely . therefore ( [ eq : 3.5 ] ) can be written as @xmath73 ) or ( [ eq : 2.4 ] ) , with @xmath74 .
this is demonstrated by the following argument ( here we discuss the two - dimensional case ) .
if we did not include the factor @xmath75 in ( [ eq : 3.6 ] ) , we would calculate the sum of the collision rate for the flow @xmath51 and for the time - reversed flow @xmath76 .
the time reversed flow is generated by reversing the signs of the potentials @xmath9 and @xmath8 in ( [ eq : 2.2 ] ) .
the probability density for the gaussian field @xmath77 is the same as for @xmath9 ( and similarly for @xmath8 ) .
it follows that the collision rate for the time - reversed flow @xmath76 is the same as for @xmath51 .
the expression ( [ eq : 3.6 ] ) is therefore also valid for the cases of compressible flow which we consider in this paper .    now using rotational symmetry
, one finds the very simple expression @xmath78 where @xmath79 is the the area of the sphere of radius @xmath3 in @xmath34 dimensions ( explicitly @xmath80 and @xmath81 ) . for the gaussian model flow which we consider , equation ( [ eq : 3.7 ] ) gives @xmath82 with @xmath83      the saffman - turner expression for the collision rate , equation ( [ eq : 3.1 ] ) or ( [ eq : 3.7 ] ) , correctly describes the initial collision rate .
there are , however , two reasons why the collision rate may approach a significantly different value after an initial transient .    the first reason why ( [ eq : 3.1 ] ) may fail arises from the fact that the flow field fluctuates in time . recall that we are concerned with the rate at which pairs of particles collide for the first time
if the flow is time - dependent , the relative position coordinate @xmath84 may pass through the sphere of radius @xmath3 more than once .
this effect may be accounted for by writing the collision rate in the form @xmath85 as before @xmath86 is the @xmath34-dimensional surface element at @xmath64 and @xmath61 is the radial velocity component ( the relative speed ) and the heaviside step function ensures that only particles entering the sphere contribute to the collision rate .
the factor @xmath87 is the density of particles in the neighbourhood of the test particle at time @xmath48 .
the function @xmath88 is an indicator function : it is equal to unity if the point reaching the surface element @xmath47 at radius @xmath3 and at time @xmath48 has not previously passed through the sphere of radius @xmath3 , otherwise it is zero .
the effect of including the function @xmath88 is illustrated in figure [ fig : 2 ] .
the collision rate will reduce below the saffman - turner estimate for times where @xmath88 is no longer unity ..     initial positions of particles which have collided with a reference particle at the origin after a certain time ( shaded regions ) .
the collision region ( disk of radius @xmath3 ) is bounded by a dashed circle . at short times
this region extends along the direction of the stable eigenvector of the initial flow . at intermediate times
, we see the effect of this eigenvector having rotated . at long times , the set of colliding initial conditions is stretched and folded .
the shaded region then covers most of the surface of the circle , including the region where the radial velocity is inward .
the figure shows results of a simulated flow with small kubo number , of the type discussed in section [ sec : 4 ] , at times @xmath89 , @xmath90 and @xmath91 .
, width=566 ]    in the general case ( [ eq : 3.13 ] ) is difficult to evaluate since the indicator function @xmath88 depends on the history of the flow .
if the flow is rapidly fluctuating ( that is , if the kubo number of the flow is small ) , the relative separation of two particles undergoes a diffusion process which makes it possible to exactly evaluate the collision rate for a given ensemble of random flows .
a second effect may modify the collision rate from the saffman - turner estimate is that if the flow field is compressible , particles may cluster together , and the particle density in the vicinity of a test particle may be higher than the average density .
this effect is expected to cause the collision rate to increase , after an initial transient during which the clustering becomes established .
again , this effect is very hard to quantify in the general case , but we can obtain precise asymptotic results in the limit of small kubo number , where a diffusion approximation becomes applicable . because we consider particles which are advected by the flow , there is no clustering effect when the flow is incompressible .
we note that for incompressible flow the only correction to the saffman - turner estimate is the occurrence of the factor @xmath88 in ( [ eq : 3.13 ] ) .
this implies that for advected particles in an incompressible flow , the saffman - turner estimate of the collision rate is an upper bound .
in the limit of a rapidly changing flow , that is when @xmath92 , particle separations @xmath93 undergo a diffusion process ( see @xcite for a review ) . by solving the corresponding fokker - planck equation with the appropriate boundary conditions , we can determine the collision rate exactly in this limit .
consider two particles , one at @xmath94 and the other in its vicinity , at @xmath95 .
the equation of motion ( [ eq : 2.1 ] ) implies that their separation @xmath96 obeys @xmath97 integrating ( [ eq : 4.1 ] ) over a short time interval @xmath98 we obtain @xmath99 the moments of the components @xmath100 of @xmath101 are : @xmath102 assuming that @xmath103 .
we thus obtain the following fokker - planck equation for the density @xmath104 of particle separations @xcite : @xmath105 here @xmath106 is a diffusion matrix with diffusion coefficients @xmath107\,.\end{aligned}\ ] ] in terms of the correlation function @xmath14 introduced in section [ sec : 2 ] we have @xmath108\ , .
\end{array}\ ] ] in order to determine the collision rate it is convenient to write the fokker - planck equation in the form of a continuity equation @xmath109 where the components of the probability current can be identified as @xmath110 .
the collision rate @xmath111 between particles of radius @xmath0 is given by the rate at which the particle separation @xmath18 decreases below @xmath3 @xcite .
this rate equals the radial probability current of particle separations evaluated at @xmath64 , i.e. @xmath112 where @xmath113 is the radial unit vector .
we evaluate ( [ eq : 4.8 ] ) in two steps .
first ( in section [ sec : 5 ] ) we determine the steady - state collision rate as @xmath114 .
second , we determine the full time - dependence of the collision rate ( section [ sec : 6 ] ) , describing how the initial transient discussed in section [ sec : 3 ] approaches the steady state .      because of the angular symmetry of the statistics of the fluid velocity , it is convenient to transform ( [ eq : 4.4 ] ) to spherical coordinates .
the probability density @xmath115 depends on the separation @xmath18 only and obeys @xmath116 here the radial probability current @xmath117 is given by @xmath118 with @xmath119\,,{\nonumber}\\ g(r)&={\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}{\rm d}t}\big[(d-1+\beta^2)c''(0,t ) -\frac{d-1}{r}c'(r , t)-\beta^2c''(r , t)\big]\,.\end{aligned}\ ] ]
consider now the steady - state solution of ( [ eq : 4.4 ] ) , obeying @xmath120 .
the steady - state collision rate , denoted by @xmath121 , is determined by ( [ eq : 4.8 ] ) in terms of the steady - state current .
the total current @xmath122 entering a sphere of radius @xmath18 and area @xmath123 must be a constant .
this gives @xmath124 where @xmath121 is a constant , equal to the collision rate which we wish to determine .
the equation of motion ( [ eq : 2.1 ] ) is only physically meaningful when @xmath59 , so that the fluid velocity is approximately the same throughout all of the region occupied by the particle .
we will , however , solve the diffusion equation for general @xmath0 .
one reason for treating the general case is that it is hard to verify the analytical expressions for the limiting case @xmath125 in numerical investigations .    to determine this current , it is necessary to consider the appropriate boundary conditions
first , if the particle distribution initially is uniform with density @xmath33 , we expect it to remain so at large separations .
thus we use the boundary condition @xmath126 the boundary condition ( [ eq : 5.1 ] ) is implemented as follows . for a specified current density @xmath117 we can solve ( [ eq : 4.10 ] ) by finding an integrating factor @xmath127 : @xmath128 with integration constant @xmath129 and @xmath130 the boundary condition ( [ eq : 5.1 ] ) determines the integration constant in ( [ eq : 5.2 ] ) to be @xmath131 .
second , when particles comes closer than the distance of @xmath3 they collide and must be removed .
this is taken care of by the following boundary condition at @xmath3 : @xmath132 inserting this boundary condition into ( [ eq : 5.2 ] ) yields @xmath133 using @xmath134 and solving for the constant @xmath121 we find the following expression for the collision rate : @xmath135^{-1}\ ] ] where @xmath136 is the gamma function .
equation ( [ eq : 5.6 ] ) is the main result of this section .
we continue by discussing a number of limiting cases .      for an incompressible flow ( @xmath137 ) ,
the integrating factor is just unity ( incompressibility @xmath138 implies @xmath139 which in turn implies that the term proportional to @xmath115 in ( [ eq : 4.10 ] ) vanishes ) . in this case ,
equation ( [ eq : 5.6 ] ) simplifies to @xmath140^{-1}\hspace*{-3mm}\ , .
\label{eq : 5.7}\end{aligned}\ ] ]      when @xmath142 , the strength of the solenoidal and potential parts of the field are equal .
this case may be relevant to the dynamics of particles floating on the surface of a turbulent fluid @xcite .
the collision rate can be evaluated exactly in this case , by rewriting ( [ eq : 5.6 ] ) as @xmath143^{-1}\ , .
\label{eq : 5.8}\end{aligned}\ ] ] setting @xmath144 we find @xmath145 for @xmath146 . when @xmath147 we obtain @xmath148 what makes it possible to find exact solutions in this case is the fact that when @xmath142 , the functions @xmath149 and @xmath150 in ( [ eq : 4.11 ] ) are related as @xmath151 .
note that this relation is always true in one spatial dimension , independent of the value of @xmath21 .
note also that when @xmath151 , equation ( [ eq : 4.10 ] ) can be solved for @xmath115 by integration ( starting at e.g. @xmath3 , with @xmath152 ) @xmath153 thus , a non - vanishing steady - state collision rate is obtained only if @xmath154 or when @xmath147 .
the collision rate must vanish as the particle size approaches zero .
this means that the integral in the denominator in ( [ eq : 5.6 ] ) must diverge for small @xmath0 . thus if @xmath59 is small enough , the major contribution in the integral in ( [ eq : 5.6 ] ) comes from small values of @xmath18 and the relative error will be small if we replace the integrand by its small @xmath18 expansion .
it is convenient to change variables according to @xmath155 .
we expand @xmath156 and obtain approximately @xmath157 here the parameter @xmath158 is defined as @xmath159 it corresponds to the diffusion constant @xmath160 in equation ( 39 ) of @xcite and in the incompressible case it corresponds to the diffusion constant @xmath158 defined in equation ( 17 ) of @xcite : here @xmath161 is an alternative parametrisation of the compressibility , defined as follows @xmath162 the parameter @xmath161 was also used in @xcite ( and earlier work cited therein )
. it can take values between @xmath163 and @xmath164 . here
@xmath165 corresponds to a completely incompressible flow with @xmath137 and @xmath166 corresponds to a purely potential ( @xmath167 ) compressible flow . in particular , when @xmath168 the field strengths of the compressible and incompressible components of the flow are equal , @xmath142 .
using equations ( [ eq : 5.13 ] ) , we get the collision rate for small particles @xmath169 this expression was previously derived in @xcite .    for an incompressible flow , with @xmath170 ,
the particle density is uniform and the collision rate is proportional to the packing fraction @xmath171 as expected .
by contrast , if the flow is compressible , the particles will cluster on a fractal set @xcite .
this is expected to enhance the collision rate because the particle density is large within the clusters .
the clustering effect can be characterised by the correlation dimension of the particles , @xmath172 .
it is defined by the scaling law @xmath173 , where @xmath174 is the probability that the particle separation is smaller than @xmath175 @xcite .
we have @xmath176 and thus @xmath177 .
this expression was derived in @xcite .
equation ( [ eq : 5.16 ] ) shows that in compressible flows , the collision rate depends upon the correlation dimension @xmath178 . when @xmath179 the collision rate in a compressible flow is therefore much larger than the corresponding rate in an incompressible flow .
note finally that the steady - state collision rate ( [ eq : 5.16 ] ) tends to zero when @xmath180 , i.e. when @xmath181 . for values of @xmath21 larger than @xmath182 , no steady - state current satisfying our boundary conditions exists .
in one spatial dimension the parameter @xmath182 vanishes : no non - trivial steady state exists because all particle trajectories eventually coalesce ( this effect was termed path - coalescence wilkinson & mehlig @xcite ) .
when the correlation function @xmath14 is of the gaussian form ( [ eq : 2.6 ] ) , we obtain from ( [ eq : 5.6 ] ) @xmath183{\nonumber}\\ & \times\exp{\left(}\beta^2{\int_{\bar r}^{\infty}{\rm d}r ' } r ' \frac{2+d - r'^2}{(d-1+\beta^2){\left(}e^{r'^2/2}-1{\right)}+\beta^2r'^2}{\right)}\bigg\}^{-1 } \bigg]^{-1 } \label{eq : 5.18}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where as before @xmath184 . the major contribution to
the integral comes from small values of @xmath185 ( except for when @xmath186 and @xmath142 or @xmath187 , when the integral diverges ) and for small values of @xmath188 , the integrand can be expanded in powers of @xmath185 . expanding the exponential function in the integrand yields @xmath189 where the function @xmath127 was defined in ( [ eq : 5.3 ] ) . the diffusion constant @xmath158 is given by ( [ eq : 5.14 ] ) . with (
[ eq : 2.6 ] ) we find @xmath190 for low dimensions , @xmath191 is a fairly good approximation ( a maximum of 3 percent error when @xmath186 ) .
substituting ( [ eq : 5.21 ] ) into ( [ eq : 5.19 ] ) gives once more ( [ eq : 5.16 ] ) .
so far we have derived the probability densities and collision rates for the steady state .
we now wish to derive expressions of these quantities as functions of time . to this end
we need to solve the time dependent fokker - planck equation ( [ eq : 4.9 ] ) with the boundary conditions @xmath192 as before we assume a uniform initial scatter of particles @xmath193 the collision rate is given by equation ( [ eq : 4.8 ] ) @xmath194 where we have used that the area of a @xmath34-dimensional sphere of radius @xmath195 is @xmath196 , and the gamma function is denoted by @xmath136 .
in order to render the boundary conditions homogeneous , we split @xmath197 and impose the conditions @xmath198 , and that the differential equation homogeneous in @xmath115 is also homogeneous in @xmath199 .
thus @xmath200 is uniquely given by the steady - state solutions found in the previous section .
now consider the remaining equation for @xmath201 which is identical to ( [ eq : 4.9 ] ) with homogeneous boundary conditions and initial condition @xmath202 separation of variables @xmath203 in ( [ eq : 4.9 ] ) gives ( using the radial current ( [ eq : 4.10 ] ) ) @xmath204{\right)}\ , .
\label{eq : 6.5}\ ] ] since the left - hand side depends on @xmath48 only , and the right - hand side depends on @xmath18 only , both sides must be equal to a constant , @xmath205 say . choosing @xmath206 , where @xmath207 is a positive dimensionless constant , we obtain @xmath208
note that the solution corresponding to @xmath209 has already been taken care of in @xmath210 .
therefore we can restrict ourselves to considering @xmath211 in the following .    to solve the radial part of ( [ eq : 6.5 ] )
, we consider the limit of @xmath212 , where @xmath149 and @xmath150 are simple power laws ( this follows from ( [ eq : 5.13 ] ) ) .
using the dimensionless variable @xmath155 gives the following approximate equation for small values of @xmath185 @xmath213 this is an euler equation .
its solution is obtained by the variable substitution @xmath214 , where the factor @xmath215 is included in for later convenience and @xmath216 .
we find @xmath217 where @xmath218 and @xmath219 and @xmath220 are integration constants .    for all values of @xmath221 in the allowed range @xmath222 ,
the boundary condition @xmath223 is automatically fulfilled .
the boundary condition @xmath224 gives @xmath225 , and thus @xmath226 the boundary conditions do not constrain the eigenvalue @xmath207 and we need to consider a continuous superposition of eigenfunctions @xmath227 here @xmath228 and @xmath229 are functions to be determined by the initial conditions .
it turns out that it is sufficient to consider @xmath228 for our initial condition and take @xmath230 from now on .    at time
@xmath231 we make the change of variables @xmath232 as before .
we set @xmath233 and find @xmath234 comparing this to the required initial distribution @xmath235 gives @xmath236 the left hand side is of the form of a fourier sine transform with inverse @xmath237 we insert this expression into the ansatz for @xmath199 . upon changing order of the integrations ( that is we perform the @xmath238-integral first ) , we find @xmath239 to calculate the collision rate we need to know the current @xmath240 at radius @xmath3 . to this end
we just require the derivative of @xmath115 evaluated at @xmath64 ( since @xmath115 itself is constrained to vanish there ) .
we find @xmath241 equation ( [ eq : 6.3 ] ) now allows us to calculate the time - dependent collision rate .
we split @xmath240 [ see equation ( [ eq : 4.10 ] ) ] into two parts depending on @xmath199 and @xmath210 respectively .
the second part gives the steady - state collision rate @xmath121 , see equation ( [ eq : 5.6 ] ) .
we find ( expanding in powers of @xmath185 ) @xmath242 this is our main result for the time - dependent collision rate , valid for correlations with non - vanishing fourth order derivative at @xmath243 and for small particles .
an approximation to this result can be obtained by approximating the steady - state probability density @xmath244 by expanding in powers of @xmath185 .
since the @xmath245-integral extends to infinity and since the gaussian contribution in the integrand becomes small for large values of @xmath246 , we must have that @xmath247 goes to @xmath33 as @xmath245 goes to @xmath248 , which is the case for the original @xmath247 . to accomplish this
, we match the small-@xmath185 expression of @xmath247 at @xmath249 to the large-@xmath185 expression . by using ( [ eq : 5.13 ] ) and ( [ eq : 5.16 ] ) and matching at @xmath249 we find @xmath250 where the last term is not cut off at @xmath249 as it vanishes sufficiently quickly .
the time - dependent collision rate can now be evaluated from the sum of three integrals of the type @xmath251\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath252 , @xmath253 and @xmath254 . putting everything together we find @xmath255{\right)}{\nonumber}\\ & + \bar a^{d}\bigg ( \frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi{{\cal d}}t}}e^{-\mu_0 ^ 2{{\cal d}}t}+(d+\mu_0)e^{d(d+2\mu_0){{\cal d}}t}{\nonumber}\\ & \hspace*{1mm}\times{\left\ { } \newcommand{\rbp}{\right\}}\mathrm{erf}\left[(d+\mu_0)\sqrt{{{\cal d}}t}\right]-\mathrm{erf}\left[(d+\mu_0)\sqrt{{{\cal d}}t}+\frac{\ln\bar a}{2\sqrt{{{\cal d}}t}}\right]\rbp\bigg ) \bigg\}\end{aligned}\ ] ] valid for @xmath256 . for times less than @xmath257^{-1}$ ] the above expression simplifies to @xmath258 for intermediate times , @xmath257^{-1 } \ll t \ll \ln(\bar a)/(2\mu_0{{\cal d}})$ ] , we find approximately @xmath259-\mathrm{erf}\left[(d+\mu_0)\sqrt{{{\cal d}}t}+\frac{\ln\bar a}{2\sqrt{{{\cal d}}t}}\right]\rbp\bigg)\,,\end{aligned}\ ] ] while for large times , @xmath260 , where @xmath261{\right)}\,.\end{aligned}\ ] ] consider finally evaluating ( [ eq : 6.22 ] ) in the incompressible limit , we have @xmath262 and the terms involving the integral cutoffs @xmath263 cancel ( @xmath264 in ( [ eq : 6.21 ] ) ) . thus in the case @xmath137 the collision rate simplifies to @xmath265\bigg\}.\ ] ] equations ( [ eq : 6.22 ] ) and ( [ eq : 6.26 ] ) are compared to results of numerical simulations in the following section .
we performed simulations of the collision rate as a function of time at small kubo numbers , for both incompressible and compressible flows .
these illustrate ( figure [ fig : 3 ] ) the very complex behaviour of the model .
for example , in the case of compressible flows the collision rate at first decreases below the value determined by the saffman - turner approximation due to the effect illustrated in figure [ fig : 2 ] , before rising again as particle clustering becomes apparent .
collision rate for particles advected in a two - dimensional flow of the form ( [ eq : 2.2 ] ) with ( [ eq : 2.6 ] ) and @xmath266 .
particles are initially randomly distributed , initially overlapping particle pairs are removed , as are particles which have collided .
parameters : @xmath267 , @xmath268 , @xmath269 and @xmath270 for all graphs and for * a * @xmath137 and @xmath271 , * b * @xmath137 and @xmath272 , * c * @xmath273 and @xmath271 , * d * @xmath273 and @xmath272 , * e * @xmath274 and @xmath272 , * f * @xmath275 and @xmath272 .
the collision rate is approximated by the cumulative sum of all collisions up to @xmath48 , divided by @xmath48 .
the light blue areas are the intervals @xmath276 , where @xmath277 is the standard deviation of the rate , and @xmath278 is the number of realisations of the flow .
the latter decreases over time ( it is typically @xmath279 for the first two decades in @xmath48 , and @xmath280 for the last decade ) .
the saffman - turner estimates ( [ eq : 3.8],[eq : 3.9 ] ) are shown as red dashed lines .
our own result ( [ eq : 6.22 ] ) is shown as red solid lines . to correspond to the simulated collision rate ,
the plotted theoretical collision rates has been integrated to and then divided by @xmath48 . due to the assumptions in the fokker - planck theory , the long time rate ( [ eq : 6.22 ] ) is not valid for @xmath281 .
the plotted long time theory is a combination of the short time rate ( [ eq : 7.1 ] ) and the long time rate ( [ eq : 6.22 ] ) , matched at the time at which the long time rate drops below the short time rate ( which is an upper bound ) .
, width=453 ]      figure [ fig : 3 ] summarises our results for the collision rate of particles advected in flows with small kubo numbers . shown
are numerical simulations for a two - dimensional random flow of the form ( [ eq : 2.2 ] ) with correlation function ( [ eq : 2.6 ] ) .
panels * a * and * b * show the collision rate in an incompressible flow ( @xmath137 ) . as expected ( see section [ sec : 3.2 ] ) , the collision rates drops below the initial transient given by the saffman - turner approximation , ( [ eq : 3.8],[eq : 3.9 ] ) with @xmath20 . for the particular choice ( [ eq : 2.6 ] ) with @xmath266 , equations ( [ eq : 3.8],[eq : 3.9 ] ) become in two spatial dimensions @xmath282 also shown is our own theory valid for small kubo numbers ( equation ( [ eq : 6.22 ] ) in section [ sec : 6 ] ) .
the agreement between the theory and the simulations is good in all cases , but slightly better for the smaller kubo number ( panel * b * ) . as discussed in section [ sec : 3.2 ] , the initial transient constitutes an upper bound to the collision rate .
panels * c * to * f * in figure [ fig : 3 ] show the collision rate in compressible flow . now , the saffman & turner theory is no longer an upper bound ( see for example figure [ fig : 3]*f * ) , because initially homogeneously distributed particles in an incompressible flow cluster together .
the corresponding density fluctuations increase the collision rate , as our exact result shows ( equation ( [ eq : 6.22 ] ) in section [ sec : 6 ] ) .
again we observe good agreement between the simulations and our analytical result .
in this paper we have concentrated upon the solvable case of advective collisions in flows with small kubo number , which provides considerable physical insight .
we conclude by commenting on the relation between these results and collisions in a turbulent flow field which satisfies the navier - stokes equation .
the standard approach , based upon the saffman - turner formula , predicts a collision rate @xmath283 , where @xmath32 is the kolmogorov timescale @xcite of the turbulent flow .
the calculation based upon the diffusion equation gives a collision rate @xmath284 .
given that @xmath285 for a turbulent flow , we see that the saffman - turner and diffusive expressions are of the same order
.    these observations are consistent with the hypthesis that the collision rate for small particles in a turbulent flow is @xmath286 where @xmath287 is the rate of dissipation per unit mass , @xmath288 is the kinematic viscosity , and @xmath289 is a universal constant ( depending only on the dimension ) .
it would be a valuable addition to the literature on aerosols and suspended particles to determine the value of @xmath290 from numerical simulations using a navier - stokes flow .
_ acknowledgments .
_ we acknowledge support from vetenskapsrdet and from the research initiative nanoparticles in an interactive environment at gteborg university .
+    r. a. shaw , _ annu .
fluid mech .
_ , * 35 * , 183 , ( 2003 ) .
m. wilkinson , b. mehlig , and v. uski , _ astrophys .
j. suppl . _ , in press , ( 2008 ) .
m. v. smoluchowski , _ zeitschrift f. physik .
* xcii * , 129 - 168 , ( 1917 ) ; see eq . ( 28 ) on p. 156 .
p. g. saffman and j. s. turner , _ j. fluid mech .
_ , * 1 * , 16 - 30 , ( 1956 )
.    g. falkovich , a. fouxon and g. stepanov , _ nature _ , * 419 * , 151 - 154 , ( 2002 ) .
m. wilkinson , b. mehlig and v. bezuglyy , _ phys .
_ , * 97 * , 048501 , ( 2006 ) .
e. balkovsky , g. falkovich , and a. fouxon , _ phys .
_ , * 86 * , 2790 , ( 2001 ) ; cond - mat/9912027 .
g. falkovich , k. gawedzki , and m. vergassola , _ rev .
* 73 * , 913 , ( 2001 ) .
m. wilkinson , b. mehlig , s. stlund and k. p. duncan , _ phys .
fluids _ , * 19 * , 113303 , ( 2007 ) .    b. andersson , k. gustavsson , b. mehlig , and m. wilkinson , _ europhys
_ , * 80 * , 69001 , ( 2007 ) .
j. r. cressman , j. davoudi , w. i. goldberg and j. schumacher , _ new j. phys .
_ , * 6 * , 53 , ( 2004 ) .
falkovich _ et al .
_ , _ nature _ , * 435 * , 1045 , ( 2005 ) .
u. frisch , _ turbulence _ , cambridge university press , ( 1997 ) .
h. sigurgeirson and a. m. stuart , _ phys .
fluids _ , * 14 * , 4352 , ( 2002 ) .
j. kalda , _ phys .
_ , * 98 * , 064501 , ( 2007 ) .
j. sommerer and e. ott , _ science _ , * 359 * , 334 , ( 1993 ) .
p. grassberger and i. procaccia , _ physica d _ ,
* 9 * , 189 , ( 1983 ) .
m. wilkinson and b. mehlig , _ phys .
e _ , * 68 * , 040101(r ) , ( 2003 ) .
in this appendix we show how to evaluate the expression ( [ eq : 3.2 ] ) for a general matrix @xmath55 with elements @xmath291 ( we drop the subscript @xmath292 ) .
it is convenient to decompose @xmath55 into a symmetric part @xmath293 and an antisymmetric part @xmath294}$ ] @xmath295 the collision rate is independent of the antisymmetric part @xmath294}$ ] ( because rotations do not contribute to the collision rate ) .
the symmetric part @xmath296 can be diagonalised by an orthogonal transformation , @xmath297 , where @xmath298 is diagonal with the eigenvalues @xmath299 of @xmath296 . in evaluating ( [ eq : 3.2 ] )
we may write @xmath300 , where @xmath301 . since @xmath302 is just a rotation of @xmath63 which is integrated over all directions , we can replace ( [ eq : 3.2 ] ) by @xmath303      we now show how to perform the integral in ( [ eq : nsn ] ) in two spatial dimensions .
note that if the flow determined by @xmath55 is not area preserving , the particle density will change as a function of time . in this case @xmath33 in (
[ eq : 3.2 ] ) must be replaced by @xmath304\,.\ ] ] at short times we approximate @xmath305 and find @xmath306 where @xmath307 and @xmath308 .
this is the final result in two spatial dimensions , expressed in terms of the eigenvalues @xmath309 of the symmetric part @xmath296 of the strain matrix .      in three spatial dimensions
we only consider incompressible shear flows , that is a general , three - dimensional traceless matrix @xmath296 .
it has eigenvalues @xmath310 , obeying the relations @xmath311 , @xmath312 and @xmath313 .
we use a spherical coordinate system , @xmath314 and find @xmath315 substitute @xmath316 and @xmath317 we obtain @xmath318 where the transformed integrand @xmath319 is smaller than @xmath292 for @xmath320 , where @xmath321 is given by @xmath322 and @xmath323 . because the values @xmath324 can take are limited by @xmath325 , @xmath326 must be in the range @xmath327 and @xmath321 in the range @xmath328 . performing the @xmath48-integral from @xmath292
to @xmath321 gives @xmath329 where @xmath330 , if @xmath331 and @xmath332 , if @xmath333 .
expanding the integrand around in @xmath326 around the point @xmath334 ( to be determined below ) we find @xmath335 if we choose @xmath336 , which corresponds to @xmath337 , we can perform the integration after changing the order of summation and integration .
the collision rate becomes @xmath338 only even powers contribute to this sum : we have not used that @xmath339 and could thus as well have expanded the starting equations using @xmath340 and @xmath325 , with the only difference that @xmath324 would be replaced by @xmath341 in ( [ eq : a.11 ] ) .
we thus find that @xmath342 is symmetric around @xmath343 , i.e. @xmath344 .    to obtain an expression valid for @xmath331 , we reorder the eigenvalues of the matrix @xmath296 as @xmath345 and @xmath346 , giving the eigenvalue ranges @xmath347 and @xmath348 .
the integrand analogous to ( [ eq : a.5 ] ) becomes @xmath349 where @xmath340 has opposite sign as @xmath325 before .
this integrand is smaller than @xmath292 for @xmath350 , where @xmath321 is given by @xmath351 where @xmath352 lies in the interval @xmath353 and @xmath321 lies in @xmath354 .
performing the @xmath48 integral from @xmath321 to @xmath355 gives @xmath356 where we have proceeded as in deriving ( [ eq : a.12 ] ) with @xmath357 , if @xmath358 and @xmath332 , if @xmath359 .
we obtain the final result @xmath360 where @xmath361 this is the final result for incompressible flows in three spatial dimensions .    for the particular case ( [ eq : 3.3 ] ) considered by smoluchowski @xcite we have @xmath362 with eigenvalues @xmath363 .
substituting @xmath364 and @xmath365 into ( [ eq : a.15 ] ) we obtain ( [ eq : 3.4 ] ) . when @xmath366 this expression agrees with the classical result ( [ eq : 3.4 ] ) due to smoluchowski @xcite .


a central issue in the field of spintronics is the design of spin - based electronic devices.@xcite they may involve ferromagnets or external magnetic fields to control the spin degree of freedom.@xcite but recently , all - electric spintronic devices also have gained interest.@xcite they rely on spin - orbit ( so ) interaction , the strength of which is tunable via external gates in semiconductor heterostructures,@xcite a basic requirement for the realization of a spin field - effect transistor .
a spin - polarized current in a semiconductor can be generated by spin injection .
here we focus on an alternative route that relies on pumping . by varying the parameters of a mesoscopic system periodically in time , a finite charge or spin
current can be sustained .
experimental studies have investigated charge pumping in several mesoscopic devices.@xcite spin pumping has been experimentally realized in the presence of an external magnetic field.@xcite theoretical studies of spin pumping involve external magnetic fields,@xcite ferromagnetic leads,@xcite and also so  coupling.@xcite    in the present paper , we consider the minimal model that contains so  interaction : a quantum dot with two spin - degenerate orbital levels .
such a two - level quantum dot with more than two leads has been suggested as a spin filter.@xcite we focus on the _ adiabatic _ limit of pumping , i.e. , the parameters are varied slowly in time compared to the dwell time of the mesoscopic system.@xcite adiabatic pumping of charge and spin through such a two - level dot has been considered in the limit of vanishing charging energy.@xcite it was found that this system can act as an _ all - electric spin battery _
, i.e. , a finite spin current can be achieved without ferromagnets by electrically controlling the dot parameters . for specific symmetries in the tunnel coupling of the dot to the leads even pure spin currents
have been suggested . from the analysis of ref .  ,
which was based on a scattering - matrix approach,@xcite it is not clear whether and how the conclusions can be transferred to quantum dots with non vanishing coulomb interaction . to answer
this question is the main goal of the present paper .    in order to take the coulomb interaction  into account , we use a diagrammatic real - time approach@xcite that allows for arbitrary strengths of the coulomb interaction .
we focus on the limit of weak tunnel coupling , for which we perform a systematic perturbation expansion to lowest order . to emphasize the role of coulomb interaction
, we compare the limit of vanishing coulomb interaction  with the limit of an infinitely large charging energy .
the paper is organized as follows . in sec .
[ model ] we introduce the model that describes the so  interaction in a two - level quantum dot with coulomb interaction .
section  [ method ] deals with the technique to calculate the pumped charge and pumped spin during one pumping cycle . to study the dependence of the pumped charge ( spin ) on the four tunnel - matrix elements in a transparent way
, we introduce in sec .
[ isospin ] an isospin representation of the orbital degree of freedom . finally , in sec .
[ res ] we present the results for the pumped charge and pumped spin .
( color online ) energy scheme of the two - level quantum dot .
the two orbital , spin - degenerate levels can be varied in time .
they are tunnel coupled to the left ( l ) and the right ( r ) lead , with tunnel - matrix elements @xmath0 .
the leads have the same chemical potential @xmath1 . ]
we consider a quantum dot with two spin - degenerate orbital levels @xmath2 ( with labels @xmath3 for the orbital and @xmath4 for the spin ) , tunnel coupled to the left ( l ) and the right ( r ) lead ( see fig .
[ fig : model ] ) .
the system is described by the hamiltonian @xmath5 here , @xmath6 is the hamiltonian of the isolated dot , @xmath7 of the leads , and @xmath8 of the tunneling between dot and leads .
the hamiltonian for the isolated quantum dot contains two parts .
the single - particle contribution for the two orbitals @xmath9 with energy @xmath10 , which are coupled by so  interaction , can be cast in the @xmath11 matrix @xmath12 for the basis @xmath13 , where the spin quantization axis is chosen arbitrarily .
here , @xmath14 denotes the vector of pauli matrices , @xmath15 is the identity matrix , and @xmath16 is a real vector describing the so  coupling . the matrix in eq .
has the most general form that allows time - reversal symmetry .
it has been used in the context of pumping@xcite and was also recently applied to electron - transport in the presence of a magnetic field@xcite and to study the josephson current through a double - dot structure.@xcite in the following , we choose the spin quantization axis parallel to @xmath16 so the matrix becomes diagonal in spin space .
the second part of the dot hamiltonian accounts for the charging energy @xmath17 , where @xmath18 is the total number of dot electrons and @xmath19 an external gate charge . without loss of generality
, we can choose @xmath20 ( any other value can be achieved by a constant shift of the energies @xmath10 ) .
this leads ( up to an additive constant ) to the dot hamiltonian @xmath21 where the operator @xmath22 creates an electron in state @xmath2 and the corresponding number operator is @xmath23 .
we used the notation @xmath24 for spin parallel ( antiparallel ) to @xmath16 , @xmath25 , and @xmath26 .
the leads are modeled as reservoirs of noninteracting electrons , @xmath27 where @xmath28 is the creation operator for an electron with spin @xmath29 and momentum @xmath30 in lead @xmath31 .
tunneling between dot and leads is described by the hamiltonian @xmath32 with ( spin - independent ) tunnel - matrix elements @xmath0 for tunneling between lead @xmath31 and orbital @xmath9 .
pumping is achieved by varying system parameters periodically in time . in this paper
, we assume that the energy levels @xmath33 can be changed in time via external gates capacitively coupled to the system . in principle , the external gates also may affect the so  coupling , the tunnel couplings , and the electro chemical potential of the leads ( via parasitic capacitances ) . to simplify the discussion , however , we assume for the following these parameters to be constant in time .
we focus on the regime of adiabatic pumping , which is achieved for pumping frequencies @xmath34 smaller than the inverse of the dwell time .
this is valid for @xmath35 , where @xmath36 is the tunnel - coupling strength , @xmath37 , with @xmath38 .
the density of states @xmath39 is assumed to be flat and equal for the left and right leads .
we choose a gauge where all four tunnel - matrix elements are real .    to study the effect of coulomb interaction , we compare results for the limit of noninteracting ( @xmath40 ) and infinitely strong interacting ( @xmath41 ) electrons on the dot .
in the latter case , the total number of electrons in the quantum dot can only be zero or 1 .
to calculate the pumped charge and pumped spin , we use a diagrammatic real - time approach to adiabatic pumping through quantum - dot systems .
@xcite for the present context , we extend the analysis of ref .   to allow for a time - dependent transformation of the basis states .
this is necessary since the so  coupling couples time - dependent orbital levels , which , in turn , makes the dot eigenstates time dependent .
we start in sec . [ density ] with the kinetic equation for the reduced density matrix in its general form , which describes the time evolution of the dot s degrees of freedom .
subsequently , we perform both an adiabatic expansion , i.e. , a perturbation expansion in the pumping frequency ( sec .
[ adiabatic ] ) and a perturbation expansion in the tunnel - coupling strength ( sec .
[ tunnel ] ) to describe the limit of weak tunnel coupling .
the pumped charge and pumped spin currents to lowest order in @xmath36 and @xmath34 are derived in sec .
[ pumped ] . finally , in sec .
[ weak ] , we perform the limit of weak pumping which assumes small amplitudes of the pumping parameters .      the main idea of the diagrammatic real - time technique is based on the fact that the leads are described as large reservoirs of noninteracting electrons which can be integrated out in order to arrive at a reduced density matrix @xmath42 for the dot degrees of freedom only . for a matrix representation with matrix elements @xmath43 ( for the diagonal elements we introduce the notation @xmath44 ) ,
it is convenient to use the eigenstates @xmath45 with corresponding eigenenergies @xmath46 as a basis . for this
, we employ a time - dependent unitary transformation @xmath47 acting on the dot hamiltonian @xmath6 , such that @xmath48 is diagonal .
the time evolution of the reduced density matrix is given by the kinetic equation @xmath49\nonumber\\&+ \int^{t}_{-\infty}{\ : \mathrm{d}t^\prime \ : } { \bm{\mathcal{w}}}(t , t^\prime)\ \bm{p}(t^\prime)\ , . \label{master}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the bold face indicates tensor notation .
the reduced density matrix @xmath42 and @xmath50 are tensors of rank 2 , while @xmath51 and @xmath52 are tensors of rank 4 , i.e. , @xmath53 the kernel element @xmath54 describes the transition from @xmath55 at time @xmath56 to @xmath57 at time @xmath58 .
it is given by the sum over all irreducible blocks on the keldysh contour which correspond to the described transition .
the elements of @xmath51 are differences of the eigenenergies defined as @xmath59 .
the second term @xmath60 $ ] originates from the time dependence of the transformation @xmath61 , and @xmath62 denotes the time - derivative of @xmath61 . in the following adiabatic expansion and the expansion in the tunnel - coupling strength ,
we follow the lines of ref . .
in the limit of slow variation of the system parameters , such that the duration of one pumping cycle , @xmath63 , is much larger than the dwell time of an electron in the quantum dot , we can perform an adiabatic expansion of eq .
, which is equivalent to an expansion of all time dependencies around the final time @xmath58 and to systematically keep all contributions that contain one time derivative . for this ,
we first do a taylor expansion of the reduced density matrix around the finite time @xmath58 , i.e. , @xmath64 .
we then expand the kernel and the density matrix in the pumping frequency , i.e. , @xmath65 and @xmath66 .
the instantaneous order , indicated by the index @xmath67 , describes the limit where all system parameters are frozen at time @xmath58 .
the adiabatic correction , labeled by @xmath68 , contains one time derivative , i.e. , it collects all contributions to first order in the pumping frequency @xmath34 .
the difference in the eigenenergies of the isolated dot , @xmath69 , is of instantaneous order , while @xmath70 belongs to the adiabatic correction .
since both @xmath71 and @xmath72 depend only on the difference @xmath73 , it is convenient to perform the laplace transform @xmath74 . using the short notations @xmath75 and @xmath76 , the kinetic equation reads @xmath77 in instantaneous order , and @xmath78\nonumber\\&+{\bm{\mathcal{w}}}^{(a)}_t \bm{p}^{(i)}_t+\partial{\bm{\mathcal{w}}}^{(i)}_t{\ : \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}}\bm{p}^{(i)}_t \label{meqa}\end{aligned}\ ] ] for the adiabatic correction .
the normalization condition for the density matrix is expressed as @xmath79 and @xmath80 .
in addition to the adiabatic expansion , we perform a perturbation expansion in the tunnel - coupling strength @xmath36 . for a systematic expansion of the kinetic equations , we need to analyze the term @xmath81 .
it vanishes for all diagonal matrix elements of @xmath82 .
the off - diagonal matrix elements , associated with coherent superpositions , are only nonzero when the superposition is not forbidden by conserved quantum numbers and when the energy difference of the corresponding states is smaller or of the order of @xmath36 . therefore , we count all contributing matrix elements of @xmath51 to be of the order of @xmath36 .    the expansion of the kernels , @xmath83 , starts to first order in @xmath36 and the instantaneous order of the reduced density matrix to zeroth order , @xmath84 . to properly match the powers of @xmath36 in eq .  , the adiabatic correction of the reduced density matrix , @xmath85 , has to start to minus first order.@xcite    in the following , we consider the limit of weak tunnel coupling , @xmath86 , for which we restrict ourselves to the lowest - order contributions in @xmath36 .
the instantaneous part of the kinetic equation starts to first order in @xmath36 , @xmath87 with normalization @xmath88 .
for the adiabatic correction , the expansion of eq .
( [ meqa ] ) to lowest ( zeroth ) order in @xmath36 yields @xmath89 with @xmath90 .
all other terms appearing on the right - hand side of eq .
( [ meqa ] ) are of higher order in @xmath36 and drop out .
this is immediately obvious for the last two terms in eq .
( [ meqa ] ) .
but also @xmath91 $ ] drops out in the absence of any bias voltage . in this case , @xmath92 is given by the equilibrium distribution , which is diagonal with matrix elements being determined by boltzmann factors .
since energy differences , @xmath51 , of states for which coherent superpositions are allowed are of the order of @xmath36 , the difference of the corresponding occupation probabilities for these states is also of the order of @xmath36 and , therefore , vanishes in the perturbation expansion .
this means that the matrix elements @xmath93\right)^{\chi_1}_{\chi_2}=\left(p^{(i,0)}_{t\ \chi_2}-p^{(i,0)}_{t\ \chi_1}\right)\left(\bm{t}^\dagger\dot{\bm{t}}\right)^{\chi_1}_{\chi_2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] vanish for all combinations of @xmath94 and @xmath95 which are needed in the kinetic equation .
the pumped current and the pumped spin current from the dot into the left lead are given by @xmath96},\\ s_\text{l}(t)&= \frac{\hbar}{2 } \int_{-\infty}^t{\ : \mathrm{d}t^\prime \ : } { \ : \mathrm{tr}\ ! \left [ { \bm{\mathcal{w}}}^{\text{l}}_s(t , t{^\prime})\:\bm{p}(t{^\prime } )   \right]},\end{aligned}\ ] ] respectively .
here , we have introduced @xmath97 where @xmath98 only contains those diagrams of @xmath99 in which @xmath100 electrons with spin @xmath29 enter the left lead , i.e. , in which the number of lines for lead @xmath101 and spin @xmath29 going from the upper to the lower contour minus the number of lines from the lower to the upper contour is @xmath100 .
analogously to the expansion of the kinetic equation , we perform the adiabatic expansion and the perturbation expansion in the tunnel - coupling strength for the pumped charge and spin current .
to lowest order we get @xmath102 } , \label{eq : current1}\\ s^{(a,0)}_\text{l}(t)&= \frac{\hbar}{2 } { \ : \mathrm{tr}\ ! \left [ \left({\bm{\mathcal{w}}}^{\text{l}}_{s , t}\right)^{(i,1)}\:\bm{p}_t^{(a,-1 ) }   \right]}.\label{eq : current2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the pumped charge and the pumped spin per pumping cycle is obtained by integration , @xmath103 and @xmath104 . the diagrammatic rules to calculate analytically @xmath105 can be found in appendix  [ rules ] .
@xcite after having determined @xmath105 , we obtain the adiabatic correction to the reduced density matrix , @xmath106 , by solving the kinetic equations and .
those , then , enter eqs .   and for the pumped charge and spin currents .
we split the energy of the orbital levels into the time - averaged part , @xmath107 , and the deviation @xmath108 : @xmath109 in the limit of weak pumping , the time - dependent part of the pumping parameters is small compared to other energy scales of the system such as tunnel - coupling strength and temperature , @xmath110 .
hence , we can expand the pumped charge , @xmath111 , and pumped spin , @xmath112 , to lowest ( bilinear ) order in @xmath113 and @xmath114 .
for adiabatic pumping , the pumped charge ( spin ) is proportional to the area enclosed by the path of @xmath115 in the parameter space during one pumping cycle .
therefore , a phase difference is necessary to gain finite pumped charge ( spin ) .
the enclosed area is given by @xmath116 .
all results in sec .
[ res ] are calculated in the weak - pumping limit .
for each matrix element @xmath117 that needs to be considered ( all diagonal ones and those off - diagonal ones that describe possible coherent superpositions ) , there is one kinetic equation .
it is often convenient to transform the reduced density matrix such that only linear combinations of the @xmath117 s appear , which allows for a straightforward physical interpretation . in the context of spin transport through a single - level quantum dot with ferromagnetic leads , it is advantageous to formulate the kinetic equations separately for the occupation probability of zero , one or two electrons on the quantum dot , and the three components of the spin on the dot .  @xcite the vector character of the spin accounts for both a spin imbalance along a given axis and the coherent dynamics of the accumulated spin .
one virtue of such a transformation lies in the fact that it is possible to write the kinetic equation in a ( spin-)coordinate - free form , which does not depend on the choice of the spin quantization axis .
a similar transformation can also be used for the orbital degree of freedom in systems in which coherent superpositions of the occupation of different orbitals appear .
these superpositions are conveniently described by defining an isospin .
this has been done before for several double - dot systems .
@xcite we will introduce such an isospin description now for the system under consideration .    in this paper , we focus on the limits of @xmath40 and @xmath41 . in the first case , @xmath40 ,
the hilbert space is @xmath118-dimensional , i.e. , the reduced density matrix is a @xmath119 matrix .
however , since we choose the spin - quantization axes along the direction of the so  field , the hamiltonian divides into two independent spin channels . as a result
, the reduced density matrix can be written as a direct product of the @xmath120 density matrices for spin up and spin down , @xmath121 . in the basis @xmath122 that corresponds , for each spin @xmath29 , to the occupation of none of the orbitals , of orbital 1 , of orbital 2 , and of both orbitals , respectively , the reduced density matrix reads @xmath123 note that , in order to keep the notation simple , we put the index @xmath29 only once at the matrix indicating the @xmath29-dependence of each of the matrix elements .    for @xmath41
the dot is either singly occupied or empty , i.e. , the hilbert space is five - dimensional .
the reduced density matrix takes the form @xmath124 note that , here , @xmath125 is the probability that the dot is not occupied with either spin , while for @xmath40 we used @xmath126 for the probability that the dot is not occupied with spin @xmath29 , irrespective of the occupation of spin @xmath127 .    to describe the coherent superposition associated with the off - diagonal matrix elements , it is convenient to introduce , for each physical spin , an isospin operator @xmath128 with quantum - statistical expectation value @xmath129 . choosing the coordinate system for the isospin such that
@xmath130 and @xmath131 are the eigenstates of @xmath132 , we get @xmath133 , @xmath134 , and @xmath135 . since ultimately we aim at a coordinate - free form of the kinetic equations , we abbreviate the @xmath136-axis chosen above by the normalized vector @xmath137 , i.e. , @xmath130 and @xmath131 are the eigenstates of @xmath138 .    the isospin direction @xmath137 characterizes the eigenstates of the isolated quantum dot in the absence of so  coupling .
the so  coupling , however , couples the two orbitals . as a consequence ,
the dot eigenstates @xmath139 for single occupation with spin @xmath29 are linear combinations of the two orbitals @xmath130 and @xmath131 , given by the transformation @xmath140 the corresponding eigenenergies are @xmath141 , with the mean dot level @xmath142 and @xmath143 .
the transformation depends on the spin @xmath29 , the level spacing of the both orbitals , @xmath144 , and the strength of the so  coupling , @xmath145 .
we consider the regime where @xmath145 and @xmath146 are of order @xmath36 .
therefore , the level spacing @xmath147 of the eigenenergies @xmath148 is also of order @xmath36 . as we pump on both energies , @xmath113 and @xmath114 , the transformation @xmath149 and the eigenenergies @xmath150 are time dependent .
the unitary transformation @xmath151 corresponds to a rotation about the @xmath152-axis with the spin - dependent angle @xmath153 in isospin space .
this means that the dot eigenstates @xmath154 are eigenstates to the isospin projection @xmath155 along the direction @xmath156 that is obtained from @xmath137 by the above mentioned rotation ( see fig .
[ fig : mn ] ) .
the tunneling hamiltonian couples the lead - electron states to both orbitals , i.e. , to a linear combination of @xmath130 and @xmath131 . to diagonalize the tunneling from and to lead @xmath31 , we employ the unitary transformation @xmath157 in isospin space , this transformation corresponds to a rotation about the @xmath158-axis with angle @xmath159 applying this rotation on @xmath137 generates the direction @xmath160 ( see fig .
[ fig : mn ] ) which has the following physical interpretation : only dot electrons with @xmath161 isospin projection along @xmath162 couple to reservoir @xmath31 , while the @xmath163 isospin projection is decoupled from the lead.@xcite therefore , in a ferromagnetic analogy , the leads are full isospin polarized with polarization along @xmath160 .
( color online ) scheme of different relevant isospin quantization axes .
the vector @xmath137 represents the quantization where the orbital levels @xmath130 and @xmath131 are the eigenstates of the @xmath164 operator of the isospin . the two axes @xmath165 are the quantization axes where the eigenstates of @xmath164 are the eigenstates of @xmath166 for single occupation . in a ferromagnetic analogy ,
the leads are fully isospin polarized along the axes @xmath160 . ]
first , we write the kinetic equations and in the basis @xmath167 for the @xmath40 limit and @xmath168 for @xmath41 . those kinetic equations are treated perturbatively to first order in the tunnel - coupling strength @xmath36 .
as described above , we count both @xmath145 and @xmath146 as one order in @xmath36 .
the elements of the kernel @xmath105 are calculated by the rules in appendix  [ rules ] .
including the isospin in the formulation of the kinetic equation , the system is fully described by the occupation probabilities of the dot and the expectation values of the isospins . in particular , we perform the transformation from @xmath169 to @xmath170 in the limit of vanishing coulomb interaction .
the probabilities describing the occupation of the dot with spin @xmath29 are @xmath171 for empty , @xmath125 , single , @xmath172 , and double occupation , @xmath173 . in the limit of strong coulomb interaction , @xmath41 ,
the transformation reads @xmath174 to @xmath175 .
the relevant occupation probabilities are @xmath176 with @xmath177 being the possibility that the dot is occupied by a single electron with spin @xmath29 .
we identify in the resulting kinetic equations the vectors @xmath160 and @xmath178 and get , thus , a representation that is independent of the choice of basis . in the limit of @xmath40 , we get    [ eq : dia : mequ0 ] @xmath179    where @xmath180 is the fermi function at energy @xmath181 .
as the difference of the eigenenergies , @xmath147 , is of order @xmath36 , we have to drop @xmath147 in terms which are already linear in @xmath36 .
therefore , the fermi function , @xmath182 , depends here only on the mean level position , @xmath181 , since every term which includes the fermi function is linear in @xmath36 .
in the equations for the probabilities , the isospin projections along the directions defined by the leads enter in the weighted average @xmath183 with @xmath184 . the isospin projection direction given by the so  coupling , on the other hand
, gives rise to a precession term about the effective field @xmath185 in the equation for the isospin .
this effective field is the only place where the so  coupling enters the kinetic equations .
equations   and represent both the instantaneous order and the adiabatic correction of the kinetic equation . for the first case
, one needs to set the left - hand side to zero and add the index @xmath186 to the isospin and the occupation probabilities on the right - hand side .
( note that the instantaneous part of the isospin vanishes in lowest order in @xmath36 , @xmath187 . ) for the the second case , we need to add the index @xmath186 on the left - hand side and @xmath188 on the right - hand side , respectively .    in the limit of strong coulomb interaction , @xmath41 , the kinetic equations read    [ eq : dia : mequi ] @xmath189    in addition to the effective field @xmath190 generated by the so  coupling , we identified here another effective field @xmath191 acting on the isospin .
the latter appears as a consequence of the interplay between tunneling and coulomb interaction .
it is formally identical to the exchange field acting on the physical spin in quantum dots attached to ferromagnetic leads.@xcite in the limit of @xmath192 , it is given by @xmath193    \ , , \label{eq : dia : bufeld}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath194 is the digamma function and we used @xmath195 .
the high - energy cutoff @xmath196 appearing in the second line guarantees convergence of the energy integral.@xcite physically it is provided by the smaller of the band width of the leads and the charging energy .    for practical calculations it is not necessary to use the basis - independent form of this isospin representation .
it allows for a better physical understanding of the systems dynamics but for evaluating the pumped charge and spin as described in sec .
[ method ] , it is convenient to use the basis @xmath122 in the @xmath40 limit and @xmath168 for @xmath41 .
in this section , we present the results for the adiabatically pumped charge ( spin ) in the weak - pumping regime .
to calculate those , we use the formalism that has been introduced in sec .
[ method ] .
we integrate the pumped charge and spin currents , eqs .   and ,
over one pumping cycle and obtain the pumped charge and pumped spin per pumping cycle . in order to simplify the time dependence of the pumped currents , we make use of the weak pumping limit ( see sec .  [ weak ] ) and expand the integrand up to bilinear order in the pumping parameters , @xmath113 and @xmath114 . in this case , all results are proportional to the area , @xmath197 , enclosed in the pumping - parameter space .
we normalize our results by @xmath197 and , thus , they are independent of the exact path in parameter space .    to analyze the effect of coulomb interaction , we compare results for noninteracting electrons , @xmath40 , with the limit of strong coulomb interaction .
the latter is realized by setting @xmath41 in the hamiltonian and , thereby , suppressing occupation of the quantum dot with more than one electron .
furthermore , finite coulomb interaction  influences the amplitude of the exchange field , @xmath191 , via the high - energy cutoff , @xmath196 . in all calculations , we set @xmath198 .
we assume weak tunnel coupling between quantum dot and leads , @xmath86 , i.e. , we restrict the calculation to lowest order in the tunnel - coupling strength @xmath36 .
if not stated otherwise , the so - coupling strength is @xmath199 .    for @xmath40 ,
the results of this paper can be compared with calculations that include higher orders in @xmath36 .
for example , brosco  _ et  al .
_  have studied the two - level quantum dot with so  coupling and vanishing coulomb interaction  in the limit of zero temperature.@xcite calculations to all orders in @xmath36 can be done , e.g. , with a scattering matrix approach,@xcite which is equivalent to an approach that is based on a formula relating the pumped current to the instantaneous dot greens functions.@xcite the latter is , in general , extendable to finite interaction .    in this section ,
we study the dependence of the pumped charge ( spin ) on various parameters : the strength of the so  coupling , @xmath145 , the tunnel coupling to the leads , @xmath0 , and the time - averaged dot levels , @xmath200 .
it is convenient to parametrize the latter by the time - averaged mean dot level , @xmath201 , and the averaged spacing of both orbital levels , @xmath202 .    in the regime under consideration
, the temperature appears only in two ways .
first , since the mean energy level only appears in the combination @xmath203 , the temperature provides the energy scale on which variation of the mean level energy changes the pumped charge ( spin ) .
second , the absolute value of the pumped charge and pumped spin are proportional to @xmath204 . therefore , all plots are normalized accordingly .
the dependences of the pumped charge ( spin ) on the other parameters are not affected by temperature .
the tunnel coupling of the two dot orbitals to the left and the right lead is defined by four real tunnel - matrix elements , @xmath0 .
if the tunnel - matrix elements are equal for the coupling to the left and right lead , @xmath205 , then , for symmetry reasons , there will be no pumping transport via variation of the quantum dot s levels . to achieve pumping
, the left - right symmetry needs to be broken by changing either the magnitude or the sign of one the tunnel couplings .
we find it convenient to parametrize the tunnel - matrix elements by angles @xmath206 , which have been introduced in the previous section ( see eq . ) .
the tunnel - matrix elements then are given by the relations @xmath207 and @xmath208 .
for @xmath209 both orbital levels are coupled symmetrically to lead @xmath31 , i.e. , @xmath210 , and for @xmath211 the orbitals are coupled antisymmetrically , @xmath212 . the necessary condition to get a finite pumped charge ( spin )
is @xmath213 , since @xmath214 ( even for @xmath215 ) leads automatically to an effective one parameter pumping without any finite pumped charge ( spin ) in the adiabatic limit .      motivated by the previous discussion , we first focus on a tunnel - coupling configuration with @xmath216 but @xmath213 , where the pumped charge and pumped spin are , in general , finite .
both depend on the mean dot - level positions , @xmath217 and @xmath218 , which is shown in fig .
[ fig : c ] . those orbital energies of the quantum dot can , in principal
, be adjusted by capacitively coupled gate votages .
figures  [ fig : qu0]-[fig : sui ] illustrate the pumped charge ( spin ) for @xmath40 and @xmath41 and for a tunnel - coupling configuration where the coupling to the left lead is symmetric regarding the orbitals , @xmath219 , while the coupling to the right lead is given by @xmath220 , i.e. , @xmath221 . in the case where orbital @xmath222 is symmetrically @xmath223 and orbital @xmath224 is antisymmetrically @xmath225 coupled to the left and right leads , the pumped spin is in general finite while the pumped charge vanishes for this configuration . in figs .  [
fig : psu0 ] and [ fig : psui ] the pumped spin is exemplarily calculated for @xmath226 , which is equivalent to @xmath227 .
each plot in fig .
[ fig : c ] shows a maximum and a minimum value .
for no coulomb interaction , the maximum value is located at @xmath228 ( relative to the chemical potential @xmath1 of the leads ) . in the limit of strong coulomb interaction ,
the extrema positions are shifted to values of @xmath217 , whose order of magnitude is given by the temperature .
the @xmath218-position of the maximum pumped charge ( spin ) depends on the tunnel coupling to the leads and the so - coupling strength .
increasing @xmath145 also increases the maximum s position with respect to @xmath218 .
furthermore , the pumped charge is in general larger for no coulomb interaction  apart from special tunnel - coupling configurations discussed in detail in the next section .
that is not surprising since the coulomb interaction  reduces the possible transport channels through the dot by suppressing occupations of the dot with more than one electron .
both limits @xmath40 and @xmath41 show different symmetries with respect to @xmath229 . in the limit @xmath40 , the pumped charge ( spin )
is exactly antisymmetric in @xmath218 .
the antisymmetry with respect to @xmath230 originates from the particle - hole symmetry .
the antisymmetry in @xmath218 alone , on the other hand , is a non - trivial result and only valid for the lowest order contribution in @xmath36 . in the limit of strong coulomb interaction
, the symmetry in @xmath218 differs from the @xmath40 limit .
the exchange field @xmath231 , which interacts with the isospin , leads to a contribution of the pumped charge ( spin ) that is not antisymmetric in @xmath218 .
therefore , the antisymmetry is , in general , broken . to point out the symmetry characteristics , we study the pumped charge ( spin ) in two different tunnel - coupling configurations @xmath232 and @xmath233 , for both @xmath234 , @xmath235 which is equivalent to ( 1 ) : @xmath236 , @xmath237 in the first case , and ( 2 ) : @xmath238 , @xmath221 in the second one . tunnel couplings @xmath232 and @xmath233 show that the exchange field can affect the pumped charge and the pumped spin differently , and the effect ,
thus , depends on the tunnel - coupling parameters .
that is accounted for by fig .
[ fig : de ] , where the cut through the contour plot ( of fig .
[ fig : c ] but with coupling configurations @xmath232 and @xmath233 ) for fixed @xmath217 is shown .
( color online ) pumped charge ( spin ) with finite so  coupling , @xmath199 , in the @xmath40 and the @xmath41 limit depending on the averaged level - spacing of both orbital levels . in the @xmath40 limit
we choose @xmath228 , which is the position of the maximum value . in the limit of strong coulomb interaction ,
we use @xmath239 as an approximation to the position of the maximum value .
the two sets of coupling parameters ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) are the ones given in the text ( see eq . ) .
the vertical dotted lines indicate _ pure spin pumping_. in the weak - coupling limit , this is only possible for pumping with coulomb interaction . ]
the fixed value of @xmath217 is @xmath228 in the limit of vanishing coulomb interaction  and , for comparison , @xmath239 in the limit of strong coulomb interaction .    for configuration @xmath232
, the exchange field leads to a peak located at @xmath240 which has a nearly symmetric behavior in @xmath218 .
the pumped spin , on the other hand , is still approximately antisymmetric in @xmath218 .
furthermore , without @xmath231 , the pumped charge ( spin ) is usually smaller for @xmath41 , compared to @xmath40 , because of the reduced number of transport channels through the dot , but the exchange field can enhance the pumped charge .
there are sets of parameters where the charge transport is even larger for finite coulomb interaction  than for @xmath40 .    for tunnel coupling @xmath233 ,
the symmetric part of the exchange - field contribution is less important . the pumped charge , in this case ,
is not dominated by a symmetric behavior as we observed for coupling @xmath232 .
it is , rather , a shift of the point of zero pumped charge to a finite value of @xmath218 similar to the pumped spin .    comparing the exchange - field contribution for configurations @xmath232 and @xmath233 , the contribution to the pumped spin reaches its maximum where the contribution to the pumped charge vanishes , and it is approximately half of its absolute maximum value where the contribution to the pumped charge has its maximum . for large values of exchange - field contribution , near its maximum
, the pumped charge has a dominant symmetric contribution while the exchange - field contribution to the pumped spin is , in general , too small to generate a peak at @xmath240 .
pure spin pumping is achieved whenever the pumped charge vanishes but the pumped spin remains finite . to find such points
it is helpful that the pumped charge and pumped spin behave differently in the presence of coulomb interaction , as discussed in the previous section , and that the pumped charge is more sensitive to symmetry in the tunnel - matrix elements than the pumped spin .
this defines the two strategies to obtain pure spin pumping : to tune either the orbital energy levels of the dot or the tunnel - matrix elements .      for fixed tunnel couplings ,
we try to tune the orbital energies such that the pumped charge vanishes but the pumped spin remains finite . as discussed above , this is easily possible for strong coulomb interaction , because in this case , the value of @xmath218 at which the pumped charge changes its sign is shifted away from @xmath240 due to the exchange field @xmath191 . in absence of coulomb interaction  ( and to lowest order in the tunnel coupling strength ) , this does , in general , not work apart from special coupling configurations , where the pumped charge vanishes independently of the orbital energies , as discussed in the next section .
the reason is that both the pumped charge and the pumped spin are , to lowest order in @xmath36 , exactly antisymmetric in @xmath218 , i.e. , the pumped charge and spin vanish simultaneously .
the comparison between the two limits is shown in fig .
[ fig : de ] .
the points of pure spin pumping are indicated by the vertical dotted lines .
another interesting feature of the finite difference between the zero - points for the pumped charge and the pumped spin is the possibility to change the sign of the pumped spin , while charge is pumped in the same direction .
there are cases in which pure spin current is not only possible for special , fine - tuned orbital energies but for _ all _ values of @xmath217 and @xmath218 .
this is illustrated in fig .
[ fig : cw ] , which shows the maximum absolute value of the pumped charge ( spin ) in the @xmath241 parameter space , as a function of the coupling parameters @xmath206 for @xmath234 and for both limits @xmath40 and @xmath41 .
the plots can be periodically continued .
the dotted lines represent coupling configurations where the pumped charge and the pumped spin are zero .    along the middle dotted line ,
@xmath242 , pumped charge and pumped spin vanish due to left - right symmetry as mentioned previously . here , the tunnel - matrix elements are equal for the coupling to the left and the right lead , @xmath205 .
the dotted zero - lines @xmath243 for zero pumped charge ( spin ) only exist for lowest order in @xmath36 ; higher - order corrections would lead , in general , to a finite pumped charge ( spin ) .
the latter conclusion can be drawn by comparing with calculations for @xmath40 which are exact in @xmath36 , e.g. , by means of a scattering matrix approach,@xcite and it is self - evident that even finite coulomb interaction  does not change that significantly . along these lines
the tunnel - matrix elements are given by @xmath244 .
in any case , these dotted lines do no mark good candidates for pure spin pumping since , there , charge and spin behave similar .    the situation differs along the dashed lines .
the middle dashed line , @xmath245 , represents a configuration where for each orbital the absolute value of the tunnel - matrix elements is the same , but one element of all four has an opposite sign , i.e. @xmath246 and @xmath247 ( or equivalently @xmath248 ) . here ,
we find ( to lowest order in @xmath36 ) pure spin pumping for both vanishing and strong coulomb interaction .
this generalizes the result found in ref .   for the @xmath40 limit to the limit of strong coulomb interaction .
the dependence of the pure pumped spin for @xmath249 on @xmath217 and @xmath218 in both coulomb regimes is shown in figs .
[ fig : psu0 ] and [ fig : psui ] .
the dashed lines @xmath250 ( equivalent to @xmath251 ) indicate a further scenario for pure spin pumping to lowest order in @xmath36 in the @xmath40 limit .
for higher orders in @xmath36 , however , the pumped charge becomes finite .
it also becomes finite for @xmath41 ( and lowest order in @xmath36 ) as a consequence of the exchange field acting on the isospin .
how important is the symmetry @xmath234 ? to answer this question
, we calculate the pumped charge and spin for @xmath252 ; see fig .
[ fig : cwa ] .    as we see , the dependence of the pumped charge and spin on @xmath206 changes substantially for the pumped charge but not so much for the pumped spin .
in particular , there are no straight lines with pure spin pumping anymore . for @xmath40 ( and
to lowest order in @xmath36 ) , pure spin pumping is still possible on curved lines in the @xmath206 parameter space but not for @xmath41 .
therefore , @xmath253 is a necessary requirement for pure spin pumping .
the dependence of the pumped charge and pumped spin on the so - coupling strength is visualized in fig .
[ fig : aso ] .
( color online ) pumped charge and pumped spin in the @xmath40 and @xmath41 limits depending on the strength of the so  coupling .
additionally , the green dotted line shows the pumped charge ( spin ) for @xmath41 in the case that the exchange field is turned off by hand .
the illustrated functions are the maximum value of the pumped charge ( spin ) for given so  strength , @xmath145 , in the @xmath241 parameter space . the coupling parameters are : @xmath234 , @xmath219 , and @xmath254 . ]    here , the different functions again show the maximum value of the absolute pumped charge ( spin ) in the @xmath241 parameter space . as can be seen from the upper plot , the pumped charge decreases with increasing so  coupling
. it also decreases with increasing @xmath218 . in both cases ,
the pumping is suppressed since the difference of the eigenenergies of the dot hamiltonian becomes large .
in general , the coulomb interaction  reduces the amount of pumped charge and pumped spin . for small values of @xmath145
compared to @xmath36 , however , the coulomb interaction  has the opposite effect on the pumped charge . in this regime , the coulomb interaction  increases the pumped charge compared to the limit of @xmath40 .
the latter is an effect of the exchange field : without the exchange field , the pumped charge would be reduced due to the coulomb interaction . increasing @xmath145 decreases the influence of the exchange field , i.e. , for large @xmath145 the coulomb interaction  again reduces the pumped charge .
for the pumped spin , the situation differs : the exchange field reduces the pumped spin even further .
the pumped spin , in contrast to the pumped charge , vanishes for @xmath255 .
therefore , there is an optimal value of @xmath145 that maximizes the pumped spin ( see fig .
[ fig : aso ] ) . this value is smaller than @xmath36 and it depends on the tunnel coupling .
we analyze the possibility to build an all - electric spin battery and to generate a pure spin current with a two - level quantum dot in the presence of coulomb interaction . in the limit of vanishing coulomb interaction ,
both are possible , as has been demonstrated in ref .  .
here , we show that this is also possible for the experimentally relevant case of a quantum dot with large coulomb interaction .
the coulomb interaction  changes the pumping characteristics substantially .
in particular , symmetries with respect to the orbital energies change as a consequence of an effective exchange field acting on an isospin defined by the orbital level index .
the nonvanishing coulomb interaction  opens the possibility to achieve a pure spin current by tuning the orbital levels in the weak tunnel - coupling limit .
furthermore , we find that a pure spin current is obtained independently of the orbital level energies for a certain configuration of tunnel couplings , where one level is symmetrically and the other one antisymmetrically coupled to the left and right lead , @xmath246 and @xmath247 in terms of tunnel - matrix elements .
we acknowledge financial support from the dfg via spp 1285 and the eu under grant no .
238345 ( geomdiss ) .
we now specify the diagrammatic rules to calculate the diagrams of the kernels @xmath256 with @xmath257 tunneling lines based on refs . .
throughout the presented calculations , only the diagrams with one tunneling line @xmath258 are necessary .    1 .   draw all topologically different irreducible diagrams with @xmath257 tunneling lines and the dot eigenstates @xmath259 , for @xmath40 , and @xmath260 , for @xmath41 , contributing to @xmath256 .
each segment of the upper and lower contour separated by vertices is assigned with the corresponding eigenenergy @xmath261 .
each tunneling line is labeled with the lead @xmath31 , spin @xmath29 and energy @xmath262 .
each time segment of the diagram between two vertices at the times @xmath263 and @xmath264 leads to a contribution @xmath265 , where @xmath266 is the difference of left going energies minus right going energies .
each tunneling line that goes forward or backward with respect to the keldysh contour contributes with a factor @xmath267 or @xmath268 , respectively , where @xmath268 is the fermi function .
furthermore , a tunneling line that begins at a vertex containing a dot operator @xmath269 , with @xmath270 , and ends at a vertex containing @xmath271 introduces a factor @xmath272 .
the matrix elements @xmath273 are obtained from the transformation @xmath274 , with @xmath38 , where @xmath275 .
each vertex in the @xmath40 limit that connects state @xmath276 with state @xmath277 gives rise to a minus sign .
the overall prefactor is @xmath278 , where @xmath279 is the number of vertices on the lower contour line and @xmath280 the number of crossings in the tunneling lines .
6 .   integrate over all energies of the tunneling lines and sum over @xmath31 and @xmath29 .
sum up all contributing diagrams .
46ifxundefined [ 1 ] ifx#1 ifnum [ 1 ] # 1firstoftwo secondoftwo ifx [ 1 ] # 1firstoftwo secondoftwo `` `` # 1''''@noop [ 0]secondoftwosanitize@url [ 0 ]
 + 12$12  & 12#1212_12%12@startlink[1]@endlink[0]@bib@innerbibempty link:\doibase    10.1126/science.1065389 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1038/nphys551 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/revmodphys.76.323 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physics.2.50 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.78.1335 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1126/science.283.5410.2056 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1088/0022 - 3719/17/33/015 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1063/1.102730 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1126/science.1173667 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * ,   ( ) http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/physrevlett.83.203 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1016/s0304 - 8853(98)01205 - 0 [ * * ,   ( ) ] http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/physrevb.62.9996 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase    10.1103/physrevlett.87.016601 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase    10.1209/0295 - 5075/17/3/011 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1126/science.283.5409.1905 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1063/1.2767197 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase    10.1103/physrevlett.101.126803 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1063/1.2928231 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.91.258301 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.89.146802 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase    10.1103/physrevb.66.205327 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.77.195320 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.82.205308 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.91.166801 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.68.155324 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase    10.1103/physrevb.82.041309 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1143/jpsj.79.123711 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.27.6083 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1007/bf01307664 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.58.r10135 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.62.r10618 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.50.18436 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.54.16820 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.76.1715 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.86.035143 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1088/0953 - 8984/24/41/415301 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.74.085305 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.82.245319 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.90.166602 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.70.195345 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.72.205319 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.76.085335 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.79.165319 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.95.246803 [ * * ,   ( ) ]