text:
# References

Relation of uncertainty for time

Alexander K. Guts

Department of Mathematics, Omsk State University
644077 Omsk-77 RUSSIA
E-mail: guts@univer.omsk.su

January 12, 2001
ABSTRACT

We introduce two time: deterministic Newton time-stream $`t`$ and stochastic time-epoch $`\tau `$. The relation of uncertainty for time-epoch of physical events

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\tau \mathrm{\Delta }Dc_1,$$
$`()`$
where $`c_1=const`$, is proved. The function

$$D(t)=c_1\frac{d}{dt}\mathrm{ln}f_\tau (t),$$

characterizes velocity of disorganization of the event-phenomena; $`f_\tau (t)`$ is density of probability of time-epoch $`\tau `$.

The relation (\*) is verified not by means of experiment that is traditional for physics, but with the help of the reference to datas of historical science.

In the World of events $``$ we select such property as the time order. The time order contacts with such concept as a stream of time. Events are developed (unwrapped) before the observer consistently, in time. It means that for measurement of time the special measuring tool of the duration of the phenomenon in time and named a watch is used. With the help of watch to each event the concrete number named (time) moment of event or his(its) epoch is attributed. The time order allows to compare epoch of any events.

However the time stream due to which the phenomena consisting of events are developed (unwrapped) consistently, event behind event, is given to the person as noted philosopher Kant, a priori, from birth. It is consequence of such fact that the person has topologically trivial 4-dimensional body . In other words, time as a stream is only subjective perception (recognition) of the phenomena of the World of the events inherent to the person.

Therefore it is necessary to assume, that time can show itself in our human world, the world of human subjective representations about the World of events, absolutely differently than the time order. As a matter of fact it means, that time can find out itself as something that can violate time ordering in deployment of events! Hence events of which the phenomenon consists, can receive epoches with violation of the time order.

Whether means it, what time can have properties similar to a random variable? Anyway it is necessary to try to apply principles of probability theory to the description of time.

We shall accept further that the choice of the epoches (moments) of time which are attributed to events of the phenomenon with the help of some fixed watch can be casual.

Let’s forget for simplicity about such concept as a place of event. In this case events in the World of events can be distinguished only with the help of the time order and formally it means that the World of events $``$ is the linear ordered continuum like real straight line $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}`$.

Let’s assume that we choose watch $`t`$ which allow each event $`x`$ to attribute the moment of time appropriate to him, i.e. epoch $`\tau `$. We shall accept that each event gets random epoch. It is understood as the following. So far as event (atomic event or the elementary phenomenon in the sense of A.D.Alexandrov) is some idealization, it should occupy only an instant $`\tau `$ in a time-stream $`t`$. It is accepted in the theory of a relativity. But actually it is stretched in a time-stream $`t`$ and consequently its epoch $`\tau `$ is absolutely precisely unknown, though must lie on some concrete segment $`[\tau ,\tau +\mathrm{\Delta }\tau ]`$ of time $`t`$. Hence epoch $`\tau `$ of event $`x`$ is a random variable $`\tau :<X,𝐒,𝐏>\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}`$, where $`X`$ is probability space of events, $`𝐒`$ is $`\sigma `$-algebra on $`X`$, $`𝐏`$ is a probability measure on $`X`$.

Identifying space of events $`X`$ with the World of events $``$, and considering that $``$ is real straight line $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}`$, we receive time-epoch $`\tau (t)`$ as a random variable given in a time-stream $`t`$.

Event in probability theory is a measurable subset of space $`X`$. In our terminology the concept of the phenomenon corresponds to concept of event in probability theory. In turn the events which consist of the phenomenon are elements of set $`X`$ which in probability theory correspond to elementary events. In terminology of Minkowski events are points of the World of events $``$. But it is obvious that this is simplification accepted in this theory.

So, we shall accept that property of time which is shown in ”choice” of the moment of time which corresponds to event is a random variable which we shall name time-epoch.

Let $`f_\tau (t)`$ be a density of distribution of time-epoch $`\tau `$ satisfying two conditions

$$𝐌\tau =\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}tf_\tau (t)𝑑t=0$$
$`(1)`$
$$\underset{t\pm \mathrm{}}{lim}tf_\tau (t)=0$$
$`(2)`$
The first condition as it is known is not something important and is connected to a choice of origin of time $`t`$.

Let

$$D(t)=c_1\frac{d}{dt}\mathrm{ln}f_\tau (t),$$
$`(3)`$
where $`c_1=const`$. We have

$$𝐌D=c_1\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{d}{dt}\mathrm{ln}f_\tau (t)\right)f_\tau (t)𝑑t=c_1\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{f_\tau (t)}\frac{df_\tau (t)}{dt}f_\tau (t)𝑑t=$$

$$=c_1\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑f_\tau (t)=c_1f_\tau (t)|_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}=0.$$

Therefore a mean square deviation of $`D`$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }D=\sqrt{𝐃D}=\sqrt{𝐌D^2(𝐌D)^2}=\sqrt{𝐌D^2}.$$
$`(4)`$
Let’s find out sense of $`D`$ defined by the formula (3). As $`f_\tau (t)`$ density of distribution of size $`\tau `$ its(her) sense is probability of that event will receive the epoch laying on a piece of a time-stream $`[t,t+1]`$, where 1 is a standard unit of measurement of time. Let’s find out sense of $`D`$ defined the formula (3). As $`f_\tau (t)`$ is density of distribution of $`\tau `$, then its sense is probability of that event will receive the epoch laying on segment $`[t,t+1]`$ of a time-stream, where 1 is a standard unit of measurement of time.

But then by analogy to the Boltzmann formula for entropy, it is possible to declare that $`c_1\mathrm{ln}f_\tau (t)`$ is entropy of time-epoch. In other words, it characterizes a measure of disorganization of event as the phenomenon. Therefore $`D(t)`$ characterizes velocity of disorganization the event-phenomenon.

As it will be shown below this velocity the is more, than temporal borders are closer for localization of the phenomenon in a stream of time. We can deduce now some law to which time-epoch satisfies.

Theorem. If the conditions (1), (2) are held, then relation of uncertainty

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\tau \mathrm{\Delta }Dc_1$$
$`(5)`$
is true.

Proof.

To prove (5) we apply the method of Weyl \[3, p.69-70\].

We have the inequality

$$0\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\alpha t\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}+\frac{d}{dt}\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}\right)^2𝑑t=$$

$$=\alpha ^2\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}t^2f_\tau (t)𝑑t+2\alpha \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}t\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}\frac{d}{dt}\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}𝑑t+\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{d}{dt}\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}\right)^2𝑑t$$
$`(6)`$
Let’s calculate each of integrals in the right part of inequality (6). First of all, it follows from (1)

$$\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}t^2f_\tau (t)𝑑t=𝐌\tau ^\mathrm{𝟐}=𝐌\tau ^\mathrm{𝟐}(𝐌\tau )^2=𝐃\tau .$$
$`(7)`$
By using (2.2) we get

$$2\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}t\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}\frac{d\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}}{dt}𝑑t=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}t\frac{d(\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}\sqrt{f_\tau (t)})}{dt}𝑑t=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}t𝑑f_\tau (t)=$$

$$=tf_\tau (t)|_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}f_\tau (t)𝑑t=1.$$
$`(8)`$
And, at last, we have for the third integral

$$\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{d}{dt}\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}\right)^2𝑑t=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}}\frac{d\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}}{dt}\right)^2f_\tau (t)𝑑t=$$

$$=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{d}{dt}\mathrm{ln}\sqrt{f_\tau (t)}\right)^2f_\tau (t)𝑑t=\frac{1}{4c_1^2}\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\left(c_1\frac{d}{dt}\mathrm{ln}f_\tau (t)\right)^2f_\tau (t)𝑑t=$$

$$=\frac{1}{4c_1^2}𝐌D^2=\frac{1}{4c_1^2}(\mathrm{\Delta }D)^2.$$
$`(9)`$
Thus from (6)-(9) we have an inequality

$$\alpha ^2(\mathrm{\Delta }\tau )^21+\frac{1}{4c_1^2}(\mathrm{\Delta }D)^20,$$

which must be true for all $`\alpha `$. Hence

$$14(\mathrm{\Delta }\tau )^2\frac{1}{4c_1^2}(\mathrm{\Delta }D)^20$$

or

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\tau \mathrm{\Delta }Dc_1.$$

Theorem is proved.

The relation of uncertainty (5) was postulated in  as one of laws of time. The name was given to it: the law of uncertainty of descriptions. It was formulated on the basis of the analysis of the historical sources used by historians for descriptions of events of the past. Thus the relation (5) is proved not by means of experiment thai is traditional for physics, but with the help of the reference to datas of historical science.

Though without any doubt after formalization of concepts $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau ,\mathrm{\Delta }D`$ that it was not made in  it is possible to speak and about experimental check of relation (5).

Basis for reception of our result was that circumstance that space-time $``$ has a dual nature which was incorporated by the founder of this theory Minkowski . This duality consists of that on the one hand elements of set $``$ are (atomic) events, and by virtue of it $``$ carries the name the World of events, and on the other hand $``$ is arithmetic arena on which the World of events is realized.

This arithmetic arena is necessary for formalization of the World of events to attribute to events the coordinates as the four of real numbers, to world lines of the four of real functions etc. As a rule the researcher deals with mathematical space-time which we have named arithmetic arena.

However other side of space-time, the World of events, remained in a shadow and was not formalized! At the beginning of article we have identified $``$ with probability space of events $`X`$. Given probability space $`X`$ is the formalized World of events.

In other words it is necessary to look at space-time $``$ from two sides, on the one hand as on set of the elements named elementary (atomic) events and to say that event is any (measurable) subset of set $``$ as it is accepted in probability theory; on the other hand as on coordinate space (arithmetic arena), for example, $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^4`$ which is used for formalization of concepts of the World of events.

Let’s notice, that at the description of deterministic processes and the phenomena, and also at the description of stochastic processes and the phenomena which are not touching a nature as of space, and time, we use only the second point of view on the World of events, but the stochastic processes concerning of nature of time require to distinguish two sides of the World of events.

Above we used space-time as coordinate space that elementary event could receive epoch on ”an axis of time”. This epoch does not lie in ”strictly allocated place” according to the ”instruction” of the time order, but can occupy any place on ”an axis of time” not especially caring of instructions of the mentioned time order. This concerns and to spatial coordinates of events. So with the formula (5) it is possible to deduce similar formulas for mean square deviations of $`x,y`$ and $`z`$ coordinates of events.

Let’s note one more circumstance. Time as it is found out in this work can be not only deterministic time-stream connected with classical representation of Newton about time as about duration and, accordingly, with concept of the time order, but can be stochastic time-epoch, having such characteristic as density probability.

The last sets in the certain sense intensity of display (demonstration) of events of the phenomenon on a segment of uniformly (current) time-stream. Here it would be pertinent to recollect that N.A.Kozyrev wrote about density of time describing its intensity in his articles . And though in our case the question is stochastic properties of time nevertheless it is possible to be surprised the intuition of Pulkov astronomer.


format: text

text:
# Mean Field Theory of the Kondo Effect in Quantum Dots with an Even Number of Electrons

## I Introduction

The Kondo effect observed in semiconductor quantum dots has attracted a lot of interest. In a quantum dot, the number of electrons $`N`$ is fixed by the Coulomb blockade to integer values and can be tuned by the gate voltage. Usually the discrete spin-degenerate levels in the quantum dot are consecutively occupied, and the total spin is zero or 1/2 for an even and odd number of electrons, respectively. The Kondo effect takes place only in the latter case. The spin $`1/2`$ in the dot is coupled to the Fermi sea in external leads through tunnel barriers, which results in the formation of the Kondo resonant state at the Fermi level. The conductance through the dot is enhanced to a value of the order of $`e^2/h`$ at low temperatures of $`TT_\mathrm{K}`$ (Kondo temperature). This is called unitary limit. When $`N`$ is even, there is no localized spin and thus the Kondo effect is not relevant.

Recently Sasaki et al. has found a large Kondo effect in so-called “vertical” quantum dots with an even $`N`$. The spacing of discrete levels in such dots is comparable with the strength of electron-electron Coulomb interaction. Hence the electronic states deviate from the simple picture mentioned above. If two electrons are put into nearly degenerate levels, the exchange interaction favors a spin triplet (Hund’s rule). This state is changed to a spin singlet by applying a magnetic field which increases the level spacing. Hence the energy difference between the singlet and triplet states, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, can be controlled experimentally by the magnetic field. The Kondo effect is significantly enhanced around the degeneracy point between the triplet and singlet states, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$. Tuning of the energy difference between the spin states is hardly possible in traditional Kondo systems of dilute magnetic impurities in metal and thus this situation is quite unique to the quantum dot systems.

The Kondo effect in multilevel quantum dots has been investigated theoretically by several groups. They have shown that the contribution from multilevels enhances the Kondo effect. In our previous paper, we have considered the experimental situation by Sasaki et al. in which the spin-singlet and triplet states are almost degenerate. We have calculated the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, using the poor man’s scaling method. We have shown that $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is maximal around $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ and decreases with increasing $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ obeying a power law, $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })1/\mathrm{\Delta }^\gamma `$. The exponent $`\gamma `$ is not universal but depends on a ratio of the initial coupling constants. Our results indicate that the Kondo effect is enhanced by the competition between singlet and triplet states, in agreement with the experimental findings.

We have disregarded the Zeeman splitting of the spin-triplet state, $`E_\mathrm{Z}M`$ ($`M=0,\pm 1`$ is $`z`$-component of the total spin $`S=1`$), since this is a small energy scale in the experimental situation, $`E_\mathrm{Z}T_\mathrm{K}`$. Pustilnik et al. and Giuliano et al. have studied another situation where the Zeeman effect is relevant, $`E_\mathrm{Z}T_\mathrm{K}`$. Usually the Zeeman effect lifts off the degeneracy of the spin states and, as a result, breaks the Kondo effect. They have found that the Kondo effect can arise from extra degeneracy between one of the components of the spin-triplet state, $`|SM=|11`$, and a singlet state, $`|00`$, if the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is tuned to fulfill that $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Their mechanism might explain some other experimental results of the Kondo effect in quantum dots under high magnetic fields.

The purpose of the present paper is to construct a general theory for the enhancement of the Kondo effect in quantum dots with an even number of electrons, for various values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$. We adopt the poor man’s scaling method along with the mean field theory. It is well known that the characteristic energy scale of the Kondo physics, the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$, is determined by all the energies from $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ up to the upper cutoff. By the scaling method, we can evaluate $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ (its exponential part at least) by taking all the energies properly. When $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ is negligible, the energies from $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ to the upper cutoff would feel fourfold degeneracy of the dot states, $`|1M`$ ($`M=0,\pm 1`$) and $`|00`$, which enhances the Kondo temperature. With increasing $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ decreases by a power law. We extend our previous calculations to the case of $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{K}`$ which has been discussed by Pustilnik et al. and Giuliano et al. We take into account the energies not only from $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ to $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$, where only two degenerate states $`|11`$ and $`|00`$ are relevant, but also from $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ to the upper cutoff, where the dot states seem fourfold degenerate. The latter energy region has been neglected in Refs.  and . In consequence we find a power law dependence of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ on $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ again.

The mean field theory of the Kondo effect was pioneered by Yoshimori and Sakurai and is commonly used for the Kondo lattice model. It is useful to capture main qualitative features of the Kondo effect; renormalizability at the scale of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$, resonances at the Fermi level, and resonant transmission. The simplicity and universality of the mean field theory have driven us to apply it to the problem in question. Generally the Kondo effect gives rise to a many-body ground state which consists of the dot states $`|SM=f_{SM}^{}|0`$ and the conduction electrons $`\mathrm{\Pi }c_{k\sigma }^{}|0`$. The total spin of this ground state is less than the original spin $`S`$ localized in the dot. The binding energy is of the order of the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$. We take into account the spin couplings between the dot states and conduction electrons, $`f_{SM}^{}c_{k\sigma }`$, by the mean field, neglecting their fluctuations. These spin couplings give rise to resonant states around the Fermi level $`\mu `$ with the width of the order of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$. The conduction electrons can be transported through the resonant levels, which yields the unitary limit of the conductance $`G2e^2/h`$. For our study, the mean field calculations have the following advantages. (i) The enhancement of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ by the competition between the singlet and triplet states can be directly understood in terms of the overlap between their Kondo resonant states. (ii) The power law dependence of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ or $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ is obtained, which is in accordance with the calculated results by the scaling method. (iii) The mean field calculations are applicable to the intermediate regions where two of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$, are of the same order. The poor man’s scaling method hardly gives any results in these regions. Hence we can examine the whole parameter region of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ by the mean field theory. The disadvantage of the mean field calculations is that they only give qualitative answers. Hence the mean field theory and scaling method are complementary to each other for understanding the Kondo effect.

We shall discuss the relation of our approach to the renormalization group analysis of the multilevel Kondo effect. Our model effectively reduces to the one with two channels in the leads and spin-triplet (and singlet) state in the dot. The ground state of this model would be believed to be a spin singlet, which corresponds to the full screening of the dot spin. The poor man’s scaling approach and our mean field theory, however, show a tendency to the formation of the underscreened Kondo ground state with spin $`1/2`$. We should mention that the exact ground state can not be determined within the limits of the applicability of these approaches. Pustilnik and Glazman have recently proposed a different model for the “triplet-singlet Kondo effect.” In our notations, they set $`C_1=\sqrt{2},C_2=0`$ in Eq. (4) for the singlet state. Their model can be directly mapped onto a special case of the two-impurity Kondo model, for which the ground state is a spin singlet. We are concerned about the case of $`C_1C_2`$, and we find that the difference between $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ reduces as a result of the renormalization. This suggests that the case considered in Ref.  is by no means a generic one.

This paper is organized as follows. Our model is presented in the next section. In section III, we rederive $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ when the Zeeman splitting is irrelevant, using the poor man’s scaling method, in a simpler form than our previous work. Then we extend our calculations to the case of $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{K}`$. The section IV is devoted to the mean field theory for the Kondo effect in quantum dots. First we explain this theory for the usual Kondo effect in a quantum dot with $`S=1/2`$. Then we apply the mean field scheme to our model with an even number of electrons in the dot. The conclusions and discussion are given in the last section.

## II Model

We are interested in the competition between the spin-singlet and triplet states in a quantum dot. To model the situation, it is sufficient to consider two extra electrons in a quantum dot at the background of a singlet state of all other $`N2`$ electrons, which we will regard as the vacuum $`|0`$. These two extra electrons occupy two levels of different orbital symmetry. The energies of the levels are $`\epsilon _1`$ and $`\epsilon _2`$. Possible two-electron states are (i) the spin-triplet state, (ii) the spin-singlet state of the same orbital symmetry as the triplet state, $`1/\sqrt{2}(d_1^{}d_2^{}d_1^{}d_2^{})|0`$, and (iii) two singlet states of different orbital symmetry, $`d_1^{}d_1^{}|0`$, $`d_2^{}d_2^{}|0`$. Among the singlet states, we only consider a state of the lowest energy, which belongs to the group (iii). Thus we restrict our attention to four states, $`|SM`$:

$`|11`$ $`=`$ $`d_1^{}d_2^{}|0`$ (1)
$`|10`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(d_1^{}d_2^{}+d_1^{}d_2^{})|0`$ (2)
$`|11`$ $`=`$ $`d_1^{}d_2^{}|0`$ (3)
$`|00`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(C_1d_1^{}d_1^{}C_2d_2^{}d_2^{})|0,`$ (4)
where $`d_{i\sigma }^{}`$ creates an electron with spin $`\sigma `$ in level $`i`$. The coefficients in the singlet state, $`C_1`$, $`C_2`$ ($`|C_1|^2+|C_2|^2=2`$), are determined by the electron-electron interaction and one-electron level spacing $`\delta =\epsilon _2\epsilon _1`$. We set $`C_1=C_2=1`$. This is the case for $`\delta =0`$. Although $`C_1C_2`$ in general, the scaling analysis shows that the Kondo temperature is the same as that in the case of $`C_1=C_2=1`$, apart from a prefactor. The energies of the triplet state are given by

$$E_{S=1,M}=E_{S=1}E_\mathrm{Z}M$$
(5)
and the energy of the singlet state is denoted by $`E_{00}`$. We define $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=E_{00}E_{S=1}.$$
(6)
The energy diagram for the spin states is indicated in Fig. 1(a).

The dot is connected to two external leads $`L`$, $`R`$ with free electrons being described by

$`H_{\mathrm{leads}}={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =L,R}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k\sigma i}{}}\epsilon _k^{(i)}c_{\alpha ,k\sigma }^{(i)}c_{\alpha ,k\sigma }^{(i)},`$

where $`c_{\alpha ,k\sigma }^{(i)}`$ ($`c_{\alpha ,k\sigma }^{(i)}`$) is the creation (annihilation) operator of an electron in lead $`\alpha `$ with momentum $`k`$, spin $`\sigma `$, and orbital symmetry $`i`$ $`(=1,2)`$. The density of states $`\nu `$ in the leads remains constant in the energy band of $`[D,D]`$. The tunneling between the dot and the leads is written as

$`H_T={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =L,R}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k\sigma i}{}}(V_{\alpha ,i}c_{\alpha ,k\sigma }^{(i)}d_{i\sigma }+\mathrm{H}.\mathrm{c}.).`$

We assume that the orbital symmetry is conserved in the tunneling processes. To avoid the complication due to the fact that there are two leads $`\alpha =L,R`$, we perform a unitary transformation for electron modes in the leads along the lines of Ref. ; $`c_{k\sigma }^{(i)}=(V_{L,i}^{}c_{L,k\sigma }^{(i)}+V_{R,i}^{}c_{R,k\sigma }^{(i)})/V_i`$, $`\overline{c}_{k\sigma }^{(i)}=(V_{R,i}c_{L,k\sigma }^{(i)}+V_{L,i}c_{R,k\sigma }^{(i)})/V_i`$, with $`V_i=\sqrt{|V_{L,i}|^2+|V_{R,i}|^2}`$. The modes $`\overline{c}_{k\sigma }^{(i)}`$ are not coupled to the quantum dot and shall be disregarded hereafter. Then $`H_{\mathrm{leads}}`$ and $`H_T`$ are rewritten as

$`H_{\mathrm{leads}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k\sigma i}{}}\epsilon _k^{(i)}c_{k\sigma }^{(i)}c_{k\sigma }^{(i)},`$ (7)
$`H_T`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k\sigma i}{}}V_i(c_{k\sigma }^{(i)}d_{i\sigma }+\mathrm{H}.\mathrm{c}.).`$ (8)
We assume that the state of the dot with $`N`$ electrons is stable, so that addition/extraction energies, $`E^\pm E(N\pm 1)E(N)\mu `$ where $`\mu `$ is the Fermi energy in the leads, are positive. We are interested in the case where $`E^\pm |\mathrm{\Delta }|`$, $`\delta `$ and also exceed the level broadening $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^i=\pi \nu V_i^2`$ and temperature $`T`$ (Coulomb blockade region). In this case we can integrate out the states with one or three extra electrons. This is equivalent to Schrieffer-Wolff transformation which is used to obtain the conventional Kondo model. We obtain the following effective low-energy Hamiltonian

$$H_{\mathrm{eff}}=H_{\mathrm{leads}}+H_{\mathrm{dot}}+H^{S=1}+H^{S=10}+H_{\mathrm{eff}}^{}.$$
(9)
The Hamiltonian of the dot $`H_{\mathrm{dot}}`$ reads

$$H_{\mathrm{dot}}=\underset{S,M}{}E_{SM}f_{SM}^{}f_{SM},$$
(10)
using pseudo-fermion operators $`f_{SM}^{}`$ ($`f_{SM}`$) which create (annihilate) the state $`|SM`$. The condition of

$$\underset{SM}{}f_{SM}^{}f_{SM}=1$$
(11)
should be fulfilled. The third term $`H^{S=1}`$ represents the spin flip processes among three components of the spin-triplet state. This resembles a conventional Kondo Hamiltonian for $`S=1`$ in terms of the spin operator $`\widehat{S}`$

$`H^{S=1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{kk^{}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,2}{}}J^{(i)}\left[\widehat{S}_+c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)}+\widehat{S}_{}c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)}+\widehat{S}_z(c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)}c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)})\right]`$ (12)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{kk^{}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,2}{}}J^{(i)}[\sqrt{2}(f_{11}^{}f_{10}+f_{10}^{}f_{11})c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)}+\sqrt{2}(f_{10}^{}f_{11}+f_{11}^{}f_{10})c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)}`$ (14)
$`+(f_{11}^{}f_{11}f_{11}^{}f_{11})(c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)}c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)})].`$
The exchange coupling $`J^{(i)}`$ is accompanied by the scattering of conduction electrons of channel $`i`$. The fourth term $`H^{S=10}`$ in $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ describes the conversion between the spin-triplet and singlet states accompanied by the interchannel scattering of conduction electrons

$`H^{S=10}={\displaystyle \underset{kk^{}}{}}\stackrel{~}{J}[\sqrt{2}(f_{11}^{}f_{00}f_{00}^{}f_{11})c_k^{}^{(1)}c_k^{(2)}+\sqrt{2}(f_{00}^{}f_{11}f_{11}^{}f_{00})c_k^{}^{(1)}c_k^{(2)}`$ (15)
$`(f_{10}^{}f_{00}+f_{00}^{}f_{10})(c_k^{}^{(1)}c_k^{(2)}c_k^{}^{(1)}c_k^{(2)})+(12)].`$ (16)
The coupling constants are given by

$`J^{(i)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{V_i^2}{2E_\mathrm{c}}},`$ (17)
$`\stackrel{~}{J}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{V_1V_2}{2E_\mathrm{c}}},`$ (18)
where $`1/E_\mathrm{c}=1/E^++1/E^{}`$. Note that $`\stackrel{~}{J}^2=J^{(1)}J^{(2)}`$. The last term $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}^{}`$ represents the scattering processes of conduction electrons without any change of the dot state and is not relevant for the current discussion. The spin-flip processes included in our model are shown in Fig. 1(b).

## III Scaling Calculations

In this section we calculate the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ using the poor man’s scaling technique. By changing the energy scale (bandwidth of the conduction electrons) from $`D`$ to $`D|dD|`$, we obtain the scaling equations using the second-order perturbation calculations with respect to the exchange couplings, $`J^{(1)}`$, $`J^{(2)}`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$. With decreasing $`D`$, the exchange couplings are renormalized. The Kondo temperature is determined as the energy scale at which the exchange couplings become so large that the perturbation breaks down.

### A In the absence of Zeeman effect

When the Zeeman splitting is small and irrelevant, $`E_\mathrm{Z}T_\mathrm{K}`$, we obtain a closed form of the scaling equations for $`J^{(1)}`$, $`J^{(2)}`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$ in two limits. (i) When the energy scale $`D`$ is much larger than the energy difference $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|`$, $`H_{\mathrm{dot}}`$ can be safely disregarded in $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. The scaling equations can be written as

$$\frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}D}\left(\begin{array}{cc}J^{(1)}& \stackrel{~}{J}\\ \stackrel{~}{J}& J^{(2)}\end{array}\right)=2\nu \left(\begin{array}{cc}J^{(1)}& \stackrel{~}{J}\\ \stackrel{~}{J}& J^{(2)}\end{array}\right)^2.$$
(19)
(ii) For $`D\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the ground state of the dot is a spin triplet and the singlet state can be disregarded. Then $`J^{(1)}`$ and $`J^{(2)}`$ evolve independently

$$\frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}D}J^{(i)}=2\nu J^{(i)2},$$
(20)
whereas $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$ does not change.

In the case of $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|T_\mathrm{K}`$, the scaling equations (19) remain valid till the scaling ends. The matrix in Eq. (19) has eigenvalues of

$`J_\pm `$ $`=`$ $`(J^{(1)}+J^{(2)})/2\pm \sqrt{(J^{(1)}J^{(2)})^2/4+\stackrel{~}{J}^2}`$ (21)
$`=`$ $`J^{(1)}+J^{(2)},0.`$ (22)
The larger one, $`J_+`$, diverges upon decreasing the bandwidth $`D`$ and determines $`T_\mathrm{K}`$

$`T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$ $`=`$ $`D_0\mathrm{exp}[1/2\nu J_+]`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`D_0\mathrm{exp}[1/2\nu (J^{(1)}+J^{(2)})].`$ (24)
Here $`D_0`$ is the initial bandwidth, which is given by $`\sqrt{E^+E^{}}`$.

When $`\mathrm{\Delta }>D_0`$, the scaling equations (20) work in the whole scaling region. This yields

$$T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{})=D_0\mathrm{exp}[1/2\nu J^{(1)}]$$
(25)
for $`J^{(1)}J^{(2)}`$. This is the Kondo temperature for spin-triplet localized spins.

In the intermediate region of $`T_\mathrm{K}(0)\mathrm{\Delta }D_0`$, the exchange couplings develop by Eq. (19) for $`D\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Around $`D=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$ saturates while $`J^{(1)}`$ and $`J^{(2)}`$ continue to grow with decreasing $`D`$, following Eq. (20) for $`D\mathrm{\Delta }`$. We match the solutions of these scaling equations at $`D\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and obtain a power law of $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$

$$T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })=T_\mathrm{K}(0)\left(T_\mathrm{K}(0)/\mathrm{\Delta }\right)^{\mathrm{tan}^2\theta },$$
(26)
with

$`\mathrm{tan}\theta `$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{J}/[\sqrt{(J^{(1)}J^{(2)})^2/4+\stackrel{~}{J}^2}+(J^{(1)}J^{(2)})/2]`$ (27)
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{J^{(2)}/J^{(1)}}`$ (28)
for $`J^{(1)}J^{(2)}`$. Here $`(\mathrm{cos}\theta ,\mathrm{sin}\theta )^T`$ is the eigenfunction of the matrix in Eq. (19) corresponding to $`J_+`$. $`\theta 0`$ for $`J^{(1)}J^{(2)}`$ and $`\theta =\pi /4`$ for $`J^{(1)}=J^{(2)}`$. In general, $`0<\theta \pi /4`$ and thus $`0<\mathrm{tan}^2\theta 1`$.

Finally, for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$, all the coupling constants saturate and no Kondo effect is expected, provided $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$. Thus $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ quickly decreases to zero at $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$. The Kondo temperature as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is schematically shown in Fig. 2(a).

### B Case of $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$

When $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the energies of states $`|00`$ and $`|11`$ are degenerate. Then the Kondo effect is expected even when $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$. In this subsection we evaluate $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ in this special case of $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by the poor man’s scaling method.

(i) For the energy scale of $`D|\mathrm{\Delta }|=E_\mathrm{Z}`$, $`H_{\mathrm{dot}}`$ can be disregarded in $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. The exchange couplings, $`J^{(1)}`$, $`J^{(2)}`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$, evolve following Eq. (19). (ii) In another limit of $`D|\mathrm{\Delta }|=E_\mathrm{Z}`$, only the states $`|00`$ and $`|11`$ are relevant. In $`H_{\mathrm{eff}}`$,

$`H_{\mathrm{eff}}^{|00,|11}={\displaystyle \underset{kk^{}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,2}{}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}J_\mathrm{s}^{(i)}(f_{11}^{}f_{11}f_{00}^{}f_{00})(c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)}c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}J_\mathrm{c}^{(i)}(f_{11}^{}f_{11}+f_{00}^{}f_{00})(c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)}c_k^{}^{(i)}c_k^{(i)})\right]`$ (29)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{kk^{}}{}}\sqrt{2}\stackrel{~}{J}[f_{11}^{}f_{00}c_k^{}^{(1)}c_k^{(2)}+f_{00}^{}f_{11}c_k^{}^{(1)}c_k^{(2)}+(12)].`$ (30)
$`J_\mathrm{s}^{(i)}=J_\mathrm{c}^{(i)}=J^{(i)}`$ initially. The scaling procedure yields

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}D}J_\mathrm{s}^{(i)}=4\nu \stackrel{~}{J}^2\hfill \\ \frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}D}\stackrel{~}{J}=\nu (J_\mathrm{s}^{(1)}+J_\mathrm{s}^{(2)})\stackrel{~}{J},\hfill \end{array}$$
(31)
and $`J_\mathrm{c}^{(i)}`$ do not change. These scaling equations are nearly equivalent to those of the anisotropic Kondo model with $`S=1/2`$, as pointed out in Refs. .

When $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|=E_\mathrm{Z}>D_0`$, the scaling equations (31) remain valid in the whole scaling region. This yields the Kondo temperature

$$T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{})=D_0\mathrm{exp}[A(\theta )/2\nu (J^{(1)}+J^{(2)})]$$
(32)
with

$$A(\theta )=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{1+\lambda }{1\lambda }\right)\hfill & (0<\theta \pi /8)\hfill \\ \frac{2}{\lambda }\mathrm{tan}^1\lambda \hfill & (\pi /8<\theta \pi /4),\hfill \end{array}$$
(33)
where $`\lambda =\sqrt{|\mathrm{cos}4\theta |}`$. $`A(\theta )`$ decreases monotonically with increasing $`\theta `$. $`A(\theta )\mathrm{}`$ as $`\theta 0`$. $`A(\pi /8)=2`$ and $`A(\pi /4)=\pi /2`$. When $`J^{(1)}+J^{(2)}`$ is fixed, $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{})`$ is the largest at $`J^{(1)}=J^{(2)}`$ ($`\theta =\pi /4`$) and becomes smaller with decreasing $`J^{(2)}/J^{(1)}(=\mathrm{tan}^2\theta )`$.

In the intermediate region, $`T_\mathrm{K}(0)|\mathrm{\Delta }|=E_\mathrm{Z}D_0`$, we match the solutions of Eqs. (19) and (31) at $`D|\mathrm{\Delta }|`$. We obtain a power law

$$T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })=T_\mathrm{K}(0)\left(T_\mathrm{K}(0)/|\mathrm{\Delta }|\right)^{A(\theta )1}.$$
(34)
Figure 2(b) shows the behaviors of $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ in the case of $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

## IV Mean Field Calculations

### A Kondo resonance for spin $`S=1/2`$

To illustrate the mean field theory for the Kondo effect in quantum dots, we begin with the usual case of $`S=1/2`$. We assume that one level ($`E_0`$) in a quantum dot is occupied by an electron with spin either up or down ($`\sigma =,`$). The effective low-energy Hamiltonian is

$$H=\underset{k\sigma }{}\epsilon _kc_{k\sigma }^{}c_{k\sigma }+\underset{\sigma }{}E_\sigma f_\sigma ^{}f_\sigma +J\underset{kk^{}}{}\underset{\sigma ,\sigma ^{}}{}f_\sigma ^{}f_\sigma ^{}c_{k^{}\sigma ^{}}^{}c_{k\sigma },$$
(35)
with the constraint of

$$f_{}^{}f_{}+f_{}^{}f_{}=1.$$
(36)
For electrons in leads $`L`$, $`R`$, we have performed a unitary transformation of $`c_{k\sigma }=(V_L^{}c_{L,k\sigma }+V_R^{}c_{R,k\sigma })/\sqrt{|V_L|^2+|V_R|^2}`$ where $`V_\alpha `$ is the tunneling coupling to lead $`\alpha `$. The last term in Eq. (35) represents the exchange coupling between $`S=1/2`$ in the dot and conduction electrons (Appendix A).

In the mean field theory, we introduce the order parameter

$$\mathrm{\Xi }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\underset{k}{}(f_{}^{}c_k+f_{}^{}c_k)$$
(37)
to describe the spin couplings between the dot states and conduction electrons. The mean field Hamiltonian reads

$$H_{\mathrm{MF}}=\underset{k\sigma }{}\epsilon _kc_{k\sigma }^{}c_{k\sigma }+\underset{\sigma }{}E_\sigma f_\sigma ^{}f_\sigma \underset{k,\sigma }{}(\sqrt{2}J\mathrm{\Xi }c_{k\sigma }^{}f_\sigma +\mathrm{H}.\mathrm{c}.)+2J|\mathrm{\Xi }|^2+\lambda (\underset{\sigma }{}f_\sigma ^{}f_\sigma 1).$$
(38)
The constraint, Eq. (36), is taken into account by the last term with a Lagrange multiplier $`\lambda `$. By minimizing the expectation value of $`H_{\mathrm{MF}}`$, $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ is determined self-consistently (see Appendix A).

In the absence of the Zeeman effect, $`E_{}=E_{}=E_0`$. The mean field Hamiltonian, $`H_{\mathrm{MF}}`$, represents a resonant tunneling through an “energy level,” $`\stackrel{~}{E}_0=E_0+\lambda `$, with “tunneling coupling,” $`\stackrel{~}{V}=\sqrt{2}J\mathrm{\Xi }`$. $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ provides a finite width of the resonance, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=\pi \nu |\stackrel{~}{V}|^2`$, with $`\nu `$ being the density of states in the leads. The constraint, Eq. (36), requires that the states for the pseudo-fermions are half-filled, that is, $`\stackrel{~}{E}_0=\mu `$. Hence the Kondo resonant state appears just at the Fermi level $`\mu `$, as indicated in the inset (A) in Fig. 3(a). The self-consistent calculations give us the resonant width

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=\pi \nu \left|\sqrt{2}J\mathrm{\Xi }\right|^2=D_0\mathrm{exp}[1/2\nu J].$$
(39)
This is identical to the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$.

In the presence of the Zeeman splitting, $`E_{}=E_0E_\mathrm{Z}`$ and $`E_{}=E_0+E_\mathrm{Z}`$. Hence the resonant level is split for spin-up and down electrons, $`\stackrel{~}{E}_/=E_/+\lambda `$. The constraint, Eq. (36), yields $`E_0+\lambda =\mu `$ (see inset (B) in Fig. 3(a)). The resonant width $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is determined as

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2+E_\mathrm{Z}^2=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0^2,$$
(40)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0`$ is given by Eq. (39). The Kondo temperature is evaluated by this width, $`T_\mathrm{K}(E_\mathrm{Z})=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ decreases with increasing $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ and disappears at $`E_\mathrm{Z}=T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$, as shown in Fig. 3(a).

The conductance $`G`$ through the dot is expressed, using $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\alpha =\pi \nu |V_\alpha |^2`$, as

$$G=\frac{2e^2}{h}\frac{4\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\mathrm{\Gamma }_R}{(\mathrm{\Gamma }_L+\mathrm{\Gamma }_R)^2}\left[1\left(\frac{E_\mathrm{Z}}{T_\mathrm{K}(0)}\right)^2\right].$$
(41)
This is the conductance in the unitary limit for $`E_\mathrm{Z}=0`$. Figure 3(b) presents the $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ dependence of the conductance. With increasing $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$, the splitting between the resonant levels for spin up and down becomes larger. In consequence the amplitude of the Kondo resonance decreases at $`\mu `$, which reduces the conductance.

### B Kondo resonance in the present model

Now we apply the mean field theory to our model which has the spin-triplet and singlet states in a quantum dot. The spin states of the coupling to a conduction electron are $`(S=1)(S=1/2)=(S=3/2)(S=1/2)`$ for the former, and $`(S=0)(S=1/2)=(S=1/2)`$ for the latter (Appendix B). To represent the competition between the triplet and single states, therefore, the order parameter should be a spinor of $`S=1/2`$. It is $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}`$ where

$$\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}=\underset{k}{}\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}\phi \left(\sqrt{2}f_{11}^{}c_k^{(1)}+f_{10}^{}c_k^{(1)}\right)/\sqrt{3}+\mathrm{sin}\phi f_{00}^{}c_k^{(2)}\\ \mathrm{cos}\phi \left(\sqrt{2}f_{11}^{}c_k^{(1)}+f_{10}^{}c_k^{(1)}\right)/\sqrt{3}\mathrm{sin}\phi f_{00}^{}c_k^{(2)}\end{array}\right)$$
(42)
for $`J^{(1)}>J^{(2)}`$. A mode of the largest coupling is taken into account in this approximation. The Hamiltonian reads

$$H_{\mathrm{MF}}=H_{\mathrm{lead}}+H_{\mathrm{dot}}J_{\mathrm{MF}}\left[\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}^{}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}+\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}^{}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}|\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}|^2\right]+\lambda \left(\underset{SM}{}f_{SM}^{}f_{SM}1\right),$$
(43)
where

$$J_{\mathrm{MF}}=J^{(1)}+\sqrt{J^{(1)2}+3\stackrel{~}{J}^2},$$
(44)
and

$$\mathrm{tan}\phi =\sqrt{3}\stackrel{~}{J}/J_{\mathrm{MF}}.$$
(45)
The last term in $`H_{\mathrm{MF}}`$ considers the restriction of Eq. (11). The expectation value of $`H_{\mathrm{MF}}`$ is minimized with respect to $`|\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}|^2`$. The Kondo temperature can be estimated by

$$T_\mathrm{K}=\pi \nu |J_{\mathrm{MF}}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}|^2,$$
(46)
using $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}`$ determined by the self-consistent calculations (Appendix B).

First let us consider the case in the absence of the Zeeman effect, $`E_{1M}=E_{S=1}`$ and $`E_{00}=E_{S=1}+\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The resonant level for the triplet state is threefold degenerate at $`\stackrel{~}{E}_{S=1}=E_{S=1}+\lambda `$ whereas the resonant level for the singlet state is at $`\stackrel{~}{E}_0=E_{00}+\lambda `$. These levels are separated by the energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The Lagrange multiplier $`\lambda `$ is determined to fulfill Eq. (11). Figure 4(a) shows the calculated results of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Both of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are in units of $`D_0\mathrm{exp}(1/\nu J_{\mathrm{MF}})`$. We find that (i) $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ reaches its maximum at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$, (ii) for $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$, $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ obeys a power law

$$T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })\mathrm{\Delta }^{\mathrm{tan}^2\phi }=\mathrm{const}.,$$
(47)
and (iii) for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$, $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ decreases rapidly with increasing $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|`$ and disappears at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{c}T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$;

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{c}=D_0\mathrm{exp}(1/\nu J_{\mathrm{MF}})(1+\mathrm{tan}^2\phi )(\mathrm{tan}^2\phi )^{\mathrm{sin}^2\phi }.$$
(48)
These features are in agreement with the results of the scaling calculations.

The behaviors of $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$ can be understood as follows. The inset of Fig. 4(a) schematically shows the Kondo resonant states. The resonance of the triplet state is denoted by solid lines whereas that of the singlet state is by dotted lines. (A) When $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$, the triplet resonance appears around $`\mu `$ whereas the singlet resonance is far above $`\mu `$. (B) With a decrease in $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the two resonant states are more overlapped at $`\mu `$, which raises $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ gradually. This results in a power law of $`T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })`$, Eq. (47). The largest overlap yields the maximum of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$. (C) When $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$, the singlet and triplet resonances are located below and above $`\mu `$, respectively, being sharper and farther from each other with increasing $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|`$. Finally the Kondo resonance disappears at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{c}`$.

The conductance through the dot is given by

$$G/(e^2/h)=\frac{4\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^1}{(\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^1)^2}\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{11}^2}{(\epsilon \stackrel{~}{E}_{11})^2+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{11}^2}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{10}^2}{(\epsilon \stackrel{~}{E}_{10})^2+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{10}^2}\right)+\frac{4\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^2}{(\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^2)^2}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{00}^2}{(\epsilon \stackrel{~}{E}_{00})^2+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{00}^2}|_{\epsilon =\mu },$$
(49)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\alpha ^i=\pi \nu |V_{\alpha ,i}|^2`$. The resonant widths are $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{11}/\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=2\mathrm{cos}^2\phi /3`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{10}/\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=\mathrm{cos}^2\phi /3`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{00}/\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=\mathrm{sin}^2\phi `$ with $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=\pi \nu |J_{\mathrm{MF}}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}|^2`$. The conductance $`G`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is shown in Fig. 4(b), in a symmetric case of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^i=\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^i`$ ($`i=1,2`$). $`G=2e^2/h`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$ whereas $`G`$ goes to zero suddenly for $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$. Around $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$, $`G`$ is larger than the value in the unitary limit, $`2e^2/h`$, which is attributable to nonuniversal contribution from the multichannel nature of our model.

In the presence of the Zeeman splitting, $`E_{1M}=E_{S=1}E_\mathrm{Z}M`$, the resonant level of the triplet state is split into three. With increasing $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$, the Kondo effect is rapidly weaken except in the region of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_\mathrm{Z}`$. In Fig. 5(a), we show the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ in $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$-$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ plane, in the case of $`\phi =0.15\pi `$. Figure 5(b) presents $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ for several values of $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$. When $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ is large enough, the Kondo effect takes place only when the resonant state of $`|11`$ is overlapped with that of $`|00`$. Then $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ is the largest at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=E_\mathrm{Z}`$ and decreases with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ being away from this value. At $`\mathrm{\Delta }=E_\mathrm{Z}`$, $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ obeys a power law

$$T_\mathrm{K}(\mathrm{\Delta })|\mathrm{\Delta }|^{1/(2+3\mathrm{tan}^2\phi )}=\mathrm{const}.,$$
(50)
which is indicated by a broken line in Fig. 5(b). This is qualitatively in agreement with the calculated results by the scaling method.

Figure 6 indicates the conductance $`G`$ in $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$-$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ plane, when $`\phi =0.15\pi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^i=\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^i`$ ($`i=1,2`$). $`G`$ takes the value of $`2e^2/h`$ around $`E_\mathrm{Z}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }>0`$, and also along the line of $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$. ($`G>2e^2/h`$ in the neighborhood of $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$, as discussed above.) For sufficiently large $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$, our model is nearly equivalent to the anisotropic Kondo model with $`S=1/2`$. Hence $`G=2e^2/h`$ at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=E_\mathrm{Z}`$ and reduces to zero as $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ deviates from this value, in the same way as in Fig. 3(b) for the case of $`S=1/2`$.

## V Conclusions and Discussion

The Kondo effect in quantum dots with an even number of electrons has been investigated theoretically. The Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ has been calculated as a function of the energy difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }=E_{00}E_{S=1}`$ and the Zeeman splitting $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$, using the poor man’s scaling method and mean field theory. The scaling calculations have indicated that the competition between the spin-triplet and singlet states significantly enhances the Kondo effect. When the Zeeman effect is irrelevant, $`E_\mathrm{Z}T_\mathrm{K}`$, $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ is maximal around $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ and decreases with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ obeying a power law. In a case of $`\mathrm{\Delta }=E_\mathrm{Z}`$, the Kondo effect takes place from the degeneracy between two states, $`|00`$ and $`|11`$. Even in this case, the contribution from the other states of higher energy, $`|10`$ and $`|11`$, plays an important role in the enhancement of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$. As a result, $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ is maximal around $`E_\mathrm{Z}=0`$ and depends on $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ by a power law again.

The mean field theory yields a clear cut view for the Kondo effect in quantum dots. Considering the spin couplings between the dot states and conduction electrons as a mean field, $`f_{SM}^{}c_{k,\sigma }^{(i)}`$, we find that the resonant states are created around the Fermi level $`\mu `$. The resonant width is given by the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$. The unitary limit of the conductance, $`G2e^2/h`$, can be easily understood in terms of the tunneling through these resonant states. In our model, the overlap between the resonant states of $`S=1`$ and $`S=0`$ in the dot enhances the Kondo effect. The mean field calculations have led to a power law dependence of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and on $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$, in accordance with the scaling calculations.

The mean field theory is not quantitatively accurate for the evaluation of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$. (In the case of $`S=1/2`$, the exact value of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ is obtained accidentally.) In our model, the scaling calculations indicate that all the exchange couplings, $`J^{(1)}`$, $`J^{(2)}`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$, are renormalized altogether following Eq. (19) when $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|`$ and $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ are much smaller than the energy scale $`D`$. In consequence two channels in the leads are coupled effectively for an increase in $`T_\mathrm{K}`$. In the mean field calculations, the interchannel couplings are taken into account in Eq. (44) only partly. In fact, conduction electrons of channel $`1`$ and $`2`$ independently take part in the conductance, Eq. (49). By the perturbation calculations with respect to the exchange couplings, we find that mixing terms between the channels appear in the logarithmic corrections to the conductance. We could improve the mean field calculations by adopting another form of the order parameter than Eq. (42).

Our calculated results explain the experimental findings by Sasaki et al.: The Kondo effect is largely enhanced around $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ when the Zeeman effect is irrelevant. The behavior of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ in the presence of the Zeeman effect may be observed experimentally under higher magnetic fields. In experiments the value of the Zeeman splitting can be controlled by applying a magnetic field parallel to the quantum dot. More generally, it is possible to control several parameters in semiconductor quantum dots and to realize new situations which cannot be reached in traditional solid state context. The quantum dot systems, therefore, have the potential of tools to explore the Kondo physics further beyond the present theory.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are indebted to L. P. Kouwenhoven, S. De Franceschi, J. M. Elzerman, K. Maijala, S. Sasaki, W. G. van der Wiel, Y. Tokura, L. I. Glazman, M. Pustilnik, and G. E. W. Bauer for valuable discussions. The authors acknowledge financial support from the “Netherlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek” (NWO). M. E. is also grateful for financial support from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for his stay at Delft University of Technology.

## A Mean field calculations for $`S=1/2`$

The original Hamiltonian for a quantum dot with one energy level reads

$$H=\underset{\alpha =L,R}{}\underset{k\sigma }{}\epsilon _kc_{\alpha ,k\sigma }^{}c_{\alpha ,k\sigma }+\underset{\alpha =L,R}{}\underset{k\sigma }{}(V_\alpha c_{\alpha ,k\sigma }^{}d_\sigma +\mathrm{H}.\mathrm{c}.)+H_{\mathrm{dot}}$$
(A1)
with

$$H_{\mathrm{dot}}=\underset{\sigma }{}E_0d_\sigma ^{}d_\sigma +Ud_{}^{}d_{}d_{}^{}d_{}.$$
(A2)
For the state of one electron in the dot, the addition and extraction energies are given by $`E^+=E_0+U\mu `$ and $`E^{}=\mu E_0`$, respectively. The parameters, $`E_0`$ and $`U`$, in Eq. (A2) should be determined to fit these energies to experimental data. For conduction electrons in leads $`L`$, $`R`$, we perform a unitary transformation, $`c_{k\sigma }=(V_L^{}c_{L,k\sigma }+V_R^{}c_{R,k\sigma })/V`$, $`\overline{c}_{k\sigma }=(V_{R,i}c_{L,k\sigma }+V_{L,i}c_{R,k\sigma })/V`$, with $`V=\sqrt{|V_L|^2+|V_R|^2}`$, along the lines of Ref. . We disregard the modes $`\overline{c}_{k\sigma }`$ which are uncoupled to the quantum dot.

We consider the Coulomb blockade region for one electron, where both $`E^+`$ and $`E^{}`$ are much larger than the level broadening $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\pi \nu V^2`$ ($`\nu `$ being the density of states in the leads) and temperature. Integrating out the dot states with zero or two electrons by the Schrieffer-Wolff transformation, we obtain the effective low-energy Hamiltonian

$$H=\underset{k\sigma }{}\epsilon _kc_{k\sigma }^{}c_{k\sigma }+\underset{\sigma }{}E_\sigma f_\sigma ^{}f_\sigma +J\underset{kk^{}}{}\left[\widehat{S}_+c_k^{}^{}c_k+\widehat{S}_{}c_k^{}^{}c_k+\widehat{S}_z(c_k^{}^{}c_kc_k^{}^{}c_k)\right]$$
(A3)
under a constraint of Eq. (36). In the second term we have included the Zeeman effect, $`E_,=E_0\pm E_\mathrm{Z}`$. The third term represents the exchange coupling between the dot spin and conduction electrons with $`J=V^2/E_\mathrm{c}`$ where $`1/E_\mathrm{c}=1/E^++1/E^{}`$. By expressing the spin operator $`\widehat{S}`$ as $`\widehat{S}_+=f_{}^{}f_{}`$, $`\widehat{S}_{}=f_{}^{}f_{}`$, $`\widehat{S}_z=(f_{}^{}f_{}f_{}^{}f_{})/2`$, one finds that Eq. (A3) is identical to Eq. (35).

The mean field Hamiltonian, Eq. (38), includes “energy levels” for pseudo-fermions, $`\stackrel{~}{E}_\sigma =E_\sigma +\lambda `$, which are coupled to the leads with “tunneling amplitude,” $`\stackrel{~}{V}=\sqrt{2}J\mathrm{\Xi }`$. The Green function for the pseudo-fermions is

$$G_\sigma (\epsilon )=\frac{1}{\epsilon \stackrel{~}{E}_\sigma +\mathrm{i}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}},$$
(A4)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=\pi \nu |\stackrel{~}{V}|^2`$. This represents the resonant tunneling with the resonant width $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$.

The expectation value of the Hamiltonian, Eq. (38), is written as

$$E_{\mathrm{MF}}=\underset{\sigma }{}\left[\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{\pi }+\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}_\sigma }{\pi }\mathrm{tan}^1\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{\stackrel{~}{E}_\sigma }+\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{2\pi }\mathrm{ln}\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}_\sigma ^2+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2}{D_0^2}\right]\lambda +\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{\pi \nu J},$$
(A5)
where $`D_0`$ is the bandwidth in the leads. We set $`\mu =0`$ in this appendix. The constraint of Eq. (36) is equivalent to the condition

$$\frac{E_{\mathrm{MF}}}{\lambda }=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\sigma }{}\mathrm{tan}^1\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}{\stackrel{~}{E}_\sigma }1=0.$$
(A6)
This yields $`E_0+\lambda =0`$. The minimization of $`E_{\mathrm{MF}}`$ with respect to $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ (or $`|\mathrm{\Xi }|^2`$) determines $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$

$$\frac{E_{\mathrm{MF}}}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}=\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{\sigma }{}\mathrm{ln}\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}_\sigma ^2+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2}{D_0^2}+\frac{1}{\pi \nu J}=0.$$
(A7)
For $`E_\mathrm{Z}=0`$, we find

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=D_0\mathrm{exp}[1/2\nu J]\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0.$$
(A8)
This is equal to the Kondo temperature, $`T_\mathrm{K}`$. For $`E_\mathrm{Z}0`$, Eq. (A7) yields

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2+E_\mathrm{Z}^2=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0^2.$$
(A9)
Using the T-matrix, $`\widehat{T}`$, the conductance through the dot, $`G`$, is given by

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}(2\pi \nu )^2{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}|R,k^{}\sigma |\widehat{T}|L,k\sigma |^2|_{\epsilon _k=\epsilon _k^{}=\mu }`$ (A10)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}(2\pi \nu )^2{\displaystyle \frac{|V_L|^2|V_R|^2}{(|V_L|^2+|V_R|^2)^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}|\psi _{k^{}\sigma }|\widehat{T}|\psi _{k\sigma }|^2|_{\epsilon _k=\epsilon _k^{}=\mu }`$ (A11)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\mathrm{\Gamma }_R}{(\mathrm{\Gamma }_L+\mathrm{\Gamma }_R)^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2}{(\epsilon \stackrel{~}{E}_\sigma )^2+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^2}}|_{\epsilon =\mu }`$ (A12)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\alpha =\pi \nu |V_\alpha |^2`$. This yields Eq. (41) in the text. On the second line in Eq. (A12), $`|\psi _{k\sigma }=c_{k\sigma }^{}|0=(V_L|L,k\sigma +V_R|R,k\sigma )/V`$, and the T-matrix is evaluated in terms of the Green function, Eq. (A4), $`|\stackrel{~}{V}|^2G_\sigma (\epsilon =\epsilon _k)`$.

## B Mean field calculations in the present model

For the spin states of the coupling between the spin triplet $`S=1`$ in the dot and a conduction electron, we introduce spinors of $`S=1/2`$ and $`3/2`$. Using the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients, they are given by

$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{1/2}^{(i)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\left(\begin{array}{c}(\sqrt{2}f_{11}^{}c_k^{(i)}+f_{10}^{}c_k^{(i)})/\sqrt{3}\\ (\sqrt{2}f_{11}^{}c_k^{(i)}+f_{10}^{}c_k^{(i)})/\sqrt{3}\end{array}\right),`$ (B3)
$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{3/2}^{(i)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\left(\begin{array}{c}f_{11}^{}c_k^{(i)}\\ (f_{11}^{}c_k^{(i)}+\sqrt{2}f_{10}^{}c_k^{(i)})/\sqrt{3}\\ (f_{11}^{}c_k^{(i)}\sqrt{2}f_{10}^{}c_k^{(i)})/\sqrt{3}\\ f_{11}^{}c_k^{(i)}\end{array}\right).`$ (B8)
The exchange couplings between the triplet state and conduction electrons, Eq. (14), can be rewritten as

$$H^{S=1}=\underset{i=1,2}{}J^{(i)}\left[2\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{1/2}^{(i)}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{1/2}^{(i)}+\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{3/2}^{(i)}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{3/2}^{(i)}\right].$$
(B9)
In the same way we define the spinors of $`S=1/2`$ to represent the spin couplings between the singlet state $`S=0`$ and a conduction electron

$$\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(i)}=\underset{k}{}\left(\begin{array}{c}f_{00}^{}c_k^{(\overline{i})}\\ f_{00}^{}c_k^{(\overline{i})}\end{array}\right),$$
(B10)
where $`\overline{i}=2`$ and $`1`$ for $`i=1`$ and $`2`$, respectively. The conversion between the triplet and singlet states, Eq. (16), is rewritten as

$$H^{S=10}=\sqrt{3}\stackrel{~}{J}\underset{i=1,2}{}[\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(i)}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{1/2}^{(i)}+\mathrm{H}.\mathrm{c}.].$$
(B11)
In $`H^{S=1}+H^{S=10}`$, a mode of the largest coupling with $`S=1/2`$ is given by

$$\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}=\mathrm{cos}\phi \stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{1/2}^{(1)}+\mathrm{sin}\phi \stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{(1)}$$
(B12)
for $`J^{(1)}J^{(2)}`$, which is Eq. (42) in the text. The corresponding eigenvalue is given by Eq. (44) and $`\phi `$ is determined as in Eq. (45).

The mean field Hamiltonian, Eq. (43), represents the resonant tunneling through the energy levels for the pseudo-fermions, $`\stackrel{~}{E}_{SM}=E_{SM}+\lambda `$. The expectation value of Eq. (43), $`E_{\mathrm{MF}}`$, is evaluated in the same way as in Appendix A. $`E_{\mathrm{MF}}/\lambda =0`$ yields

$$\mathrm{tan}^1\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{11}}{\stackrel{~}{E}_{11}}+\mathrm{tan}^1\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{10}}{\stackrel{~}{E}_{10}}+\mathrm{tan}^1\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{00}}{\stackrel{~}{E}_{00}}=\pi ,$$
(B13)
where the resonant widths are $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{11}/\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=2\mathrm{cos}^2\phi /3`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{10}/\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=\mathrm{cos}^2\phi /3`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{00}/\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=\mathrm{sin}^2\phi `$ with $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0=\pi \nu |J_{\mathrm{MF}}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}|^2`$. We set $`\mu =0`$ here. Minimizing $`E_{\mathrm{MF}}`$ with respect to $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0`$, we obtain

$$\frac{2}{3}\mathrm{cos}^2\phi \mathrm{ln}\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}_{11}^2+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{11}^2}{D_0^2}+\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{cos}^2\phi \mathrm{ln}\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}_{10}^2+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{10}^2}{D_0^2}+\mathrm{sin}^2\phi \mathrm{ln}\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}_{00}^2+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{00}^2}{D_0^2}+\frac{2}{\nu J}=0.$$
(B14)
Equations (B13) and (B14) determine $`\lambda `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0`$ (or $`|\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Xi }}|^2`$).

The conductance through the dot is given by

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}(2\pi \nu )^2{\displaystyle \underset{i,j,\sigma ,\sigma ^{}}{}}|R,k^{}\sigma ^{},j|\widehat{T}|L,k\sigma ,i|^2|_{\epsilon _k=\epsilon _k^{}=\mu }`$ (B15)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}(2\pi \nu )^2{\displaystyle \underset{i,j,\sigma ,\sigma ^{}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^j}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^j+\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^j}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^i}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^i+\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^i}}|\psi _{k^{}\sigma ^{}}^{(j)}|\widehat{T}|\psi _{k\sigma }^{(i)}|^2|_{\epsilon _k=\epsilon _k^{}=\mu }`$ (B16)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\alpha ^i=\pi \nu |V_{\alpha ,i}|^2`$ and $`|\psi _{k\sigma }^{(i)}=(V_{L,i}|L,k\sigma ,i+V_{R,i}|R,k\sigma ,i)/V_i`$. The T-matrix can be evaluated, using the Green function for the pseudo-fermions, $`G_{SM}(\epsilon )=[\epsilon \stackrel{~}{E}_{SM}+\mathrm{i}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{SM}]^1`$, as in Appendix A. This yields Eq. (49) in the text.

Figure captions

Fig. 1: (a) The energy diagram for the spin states $`|SM`$ considered in our model. $`\mathrm{\Delta }=E_{00}E_{S=1}`$ and $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ is the Zeeman splitting. (b) Spin flip processes between the spin states. The exchange couplings $`J^{(i)}`$ involving the spin-triplet state only are accompanied by the scattering of conduction electrons of channel $`i`$. Those involving both the spin-triplet and singlet states, $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$, are accompanied by the interchannel scattering of conduction electrons.

Fig. 2: The scaling calculations of the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, (a) when the Zeeman splitting is irrelevant, $`E_\mathrm{Z}T_\mathrm{K}`$, and (b) in a case of $`E_\mathrm{Z}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$. $`D_0`$ is the bandwidth in the leads. In both the figures, a, $`\theta /\pi =0.25`$; b, $`0.15`$; and c, $`0.10`$ where $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta =J^{(2)}/J^{(1)}`$.

Fig. 3: The mean field calculations for the Kondo effect in a quantum dot with $`S=1/2`$. (a) The Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ and (b) conductance through the dot, $`G`$, as functions of the Zeeman splitting $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$. $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ and $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ are in units of $`D_0\mathrm{exp}(1/2\nu J)`$ and $`G`$ is in units of $`(2e^2/h)4\mathrm{\Gamma }_L\mathrm{\Gamma }_R/(\mathrm{\Gamma }_L+\mathrm{\Gamma }_R)^2`$. Inset in (a): The Kondo resonant states created around the Fermi level $`\mu `$ in the leads, (A) in the absence and (B) presence of the Zeeman splitting. The resonant width is given by $`T_\mathrm{K}`$.

Fig. 4: The mean field calculations for the Kondo effect in the present model. The Zeeman splitting is disregarded ($`E_\mathrm{Z}T_\mathrm{K}`$). (a) The Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ and (b) conductance through the dot, $`G`$, as functions of $`\mathrm{\Delta }=E_{00}E_{S=1}`$. $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are in units of $`D_0\mathrm{exp}(1/\nu J_{\mathrm{MF}})`$. $`G`$, in units of $`2e^2/h`$, is evaluated in a symmetric case of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^i=\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^i`$ ($`i=1,2`$). $`\mathrm{tan}\phi =\sqrt{3}\stackrel{~}{J}/J_{\mathrm{MF}}`$ where a, $`\phi /\pi =0.25`$; b, $`0.15`$; and c, $`0.10`$. Note that $`\phi /\pi 1/6`$ in this approximation (case a is only for reference). Inset in (a): The Kondo resonant states for $`S=1`$ (solid line) and for $`S=0`$ (dotted line) when (A) $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$, (B) $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{K}(0)`$, and (C) $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$.

Fig. 5: The mean field calculations for the Kondo temperature $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ in the present model. $`\phi /\pi =0.15`$ where $`\mathrm{tan}\phi =\sqrt{3}\stackrel{~}{J}/J_{\mathrm{MF}}`$. All of $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ are in units of $`D_0\mathrm{exp}(1/\nu J_{\mathrm{MF}})`$. (a) $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ is plotted in $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$-$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ plane, by contour lines drawn every $`0.25`$. The brighter color indicates the larger values of $`T_\mathrm{K}`$. (b) $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ when $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ is fixed at a, $`0`$; b, $`1`$; c, $`2`$; d, $`5`$; and e, $`10`$. The broken line indicates $`T_\mathrm{K}`$ in the case of $`\mathrm{\Delta }=E_\mathrm{Z}`$.

Fig. 6: The mean field calculations for the conductance $`G`$ in the present model. $`G`$ is plotted in $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$-$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ plane, by contour lines drawn every $`0.2\times (2e^2/h)`$. The brighter color indicates the larger values of $`G`$. $`E_\mathrm{Z}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are in units of $`D_0\mathrm{exp}(1/\nu J_{\mathrm{MF}})`$. $`\phi /\pi =0.15`$ where $`\mathrm{tan}\phi =\sqrt{3}\stackrel{~}{J}/J_{\mathrm{MF}}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^i=\mathrm{\Gamma }_R^i`$ ($`i=1,2`$).

Figure 1 (M. Eto and Yu. V. Nazarov)

Figure 2 (M. Eto and Yu. V. Nazarov)

Figure 3 (M. Eto and Yu. V. Nazarov)

Figure 4 (M. Eto and Yu. V. Nazarov)

Figure 5 (M. Eto and Yu. V. Nazarov)

Figure 6 (M. Eto and Yu. V. Nazarov)