format: text

text:
# Theory of double magnetophonon resonance in 2D electron gas in tilted magnetic field

## I Introduction

Magnetophonon resonance (MPR) in semiconductors is an internal resonance that is reached when the limiting frequency of a longitudinal optic phonon equals the cyclotron frequency of an electron, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, times some small integer, $`𝒩`$ (for instance, ). Since its theoretical prediction  and subsequent experimental observation  in 3D semiconductor structures MPR, along with cyclotron resonance, has become one of the main instruments of semiconducting compound spectroscopy.

The advances in semiconductor nano-fabrication in recent years have made available materials of great crystalline perfection and purity. The electrical conduction and some other transport phenomena in such nanoscale structures has been a focus of numerous investigations, both theoretical and experimental, with a number of important discoveries. In particular, the discovery of MPR in the quantum wells took place in the pioneering paper by Tsui, Englert, Cho and Gossard . After this first publication a number of papers has appeared where various aspects of this physical phenomenon have been investigated. The most detailed experimental investigation has been done by Nicholas with co-workers (see the review paper  and the references therein). It has been shown that the 2D MPR qualitatively differs from the same phenomenon in the 3D structures. As first steps in developing theory of 2D MPR in the perpendicular magnetic field we can quote the theoretical papers . They consider the MPR within the perturbation theory approximation with regard of collisional broadening of the electron state. A theory in tilted magnetic field is developed in Ref.  where transitions to a higher band of spatial quantization are taken into consideration. To our opinion, these theories do not provide detailed interpretation of the existing experimental data. Our purpose is to give an interpretation of experimental findings , such as the double resonance, by simultaneously taking into account the screening of the phonon potential by 2D conduction electrons as well as the phonon and electron damping. For such a program, as we have indicated in , the lowest approximation of the perturbation theory is not sufficient. As is shown in the present paper, the relative role of screening is determined not by the temperature (as has been suggested in Ref. ) but by the interplay between the screening and the electron and phonon collisional damping that is usually weakly temperature dependent.

There are two main groups of the MPR experiments in quantum wells. The first group deals with the MPR in the perpendicular (to the plane of 2DEG) magnetic field. The main features of the findings in this case are (i) the fact that the resonance is determined by the transverse optic frequency $`\omega _t`$ (rather than the longitudinal frequency $`\omega _l`$) and (ii) a rather narrow interval of electron concentrations where the MPR is observable. The second group concerns with the experiments in a magnetic field tilted at an angle $`\theta `$ to the perpendicular. Its characteristic feature may be called a double resonance. For small values of $`\theta `$ the MPR is determined by $`\omega _t`$. Then, for somewhat larger values of $`\theta `$ its amplitude sharply goes down within a narrow angular interval typically of the order of 10. For even bigger values of $`\theta `$ there is another maximum, this time determined by $`\omega _l`$ . These two types of resonance may be called the $`\omega _t`$\- and $`\omega _l`$-resonances as their positions are determined by the frequencies $`\omega _t`$ and $`\omega _l`$ respectively.

In our paper  we have given interpretation for the first group of experiments. In the present paper we offer interpretation of the second group. It is shown that the angular and concentration dependencies of the MPR amplitudes are deeply interrelated.

The magnetic field $`𝐁`$ is assumed to be in the $`(y,z)`$-plane, the $`z`$-axis being perpendicular to the 2DEG, while the external electric field is oriented along the $`y`$-axis. The $`\rho _{yy}(=\rho _{xx})`$ component of the resistivity tensor will be calculated. This is the transport coefficient expressed through the 2D conductivity $`\sigma _{\mu \nu }`$ (averaged over the width of the well) as

$$\rho _{yy}=\sigma _{xx}/(\sigma _{xy})^2.$$

As usual, it is assumed that $`\sigma _{xy}^2\sigma _{xx}\sigma _{yy}`$. We consider the situation where the well is so narrow that only one electron band of spatial quantization is filled. Hence one can assume that the $`z`$-component of electron velocity vanishes. Then

$$\dot{p}_x=eE_x+\frac{eB}{c}v_y\mathrm{cos}\theta ,\dot{p}_y=eE_y\frac{eB}{c}v_x\mathrm{cos}\theta $$
(1)
where $`p_x`$, $`p_y`$ and $`v_x`$ $`v_y`$ are respectively the components of the electron quasimomentum and velocity. These classical equations illustrate the physics describing a 2D circular motion of an electron with the angular frequency

$$\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta =\frac{eB}{mc}\mathrm{cos}\theta $$
(2)
where $`m`$ is the effective mass, so that $`p_{x,y}=mv_{x,y}`$. It follows from Eq. (1) that

$$\sigma _{xy}=\frac{enc}{B\mathrm{cos}\theta }$$
(3)
where $`e`$ and $`n`$ are the electron charge and concentration. It means that within one miniband approximation the magnetic field enters the problem only in the combination $`B\mathrm{cos}\theta `$.

## II General equations

To calculate the $`x`$-component of the d.c. current it is convenient to consider the motion of a center of Landau oscillator. The conductivity $`\sigma _{xx}`$ averaged over the width of the well is given by (see Ref. )

$$\sigma _{xx}=\frac{e^2}{2k_\mathrm{B}TS}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\dot{X}(0)\dot{X}(t)$$
(4)
where $`S`$ is the area of the 2DEG, $`T`$ is the temperature, $`X`$ is the operator of coordinate of the center of Landau oscillator in the Heisenberg representation. According to Eq. (1), in the Schrödinger representation

$$X=\frac{ic}{eB\mathrm{cos}\theta }\frac{}{y}+x$$

(cf. with , Sec. 112). It commutes with the free electron Hamiltonian $``$ in magnetic field $`𝐁`$ as well as with the operator of Coulomb electron-electron interaction. This is a consequence of the quasimomentum conservation in electron-electron collisions. Here $`\dot{X}(0)\dot{X}(t)`$ is the ensemble averaged correlation function of velocities of the centers of Landau oscillators. In the present and the following sections we will usually assume $`\mathrm{}=1`$, $`k_\mathrm{B}=1`$ and will restore these symbols in the resulting formulas.

Now

$$\dot{X}(t)=\underset{\sigma }{}\psi ^{}(𝐫,\sigma )i[,X]\psi (𝐫,\sigma )d^3r=\underset{\sigma }{}\frac{c}{eB\mathrm{cos}\theta }\psi ^{}(𝐫,\sigma )\frac{\widehat{U}}{y}\psi (𝐫,\sigma )d^3r.$$
(5)
The summation is over the spin variable. Here $`\psi `$ is the operator of the electron wave function while $`\widehat{U}(t,𝐫)`$ is the operator of phonon field interacting with electrons. For the time being, we consider it as an external random field; later on we will average over all its realizations introducing the optic phonons. The expression for $`\sigma _{xx}`$ can be presented in such a form (we remind that we calculate the conductivity averaged over the width of the well)

$$\sigma _{xx}=\frac{e^2}{2TS}\left(\frac{c}{eB\mathrm{cos}\theta }\right)^2_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑td^3rd^3r^{}\widehat{n}(0,𝐫^{})\frac{}{y^{}}\widehat{U}(0,𝐫^{})\widehat{n}(t,𝐫)\frac{}{y}\widehat{U}(t,𝐫)$$
(6)
where $`\widehat{n}(t,𝐫)`$ the electron density operator. Representing the ensemble average in Eq. (6) as a sum over the exact quantum states of the system (see Ref. , Sec. 36) we get

$`\sigma _{xx}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{2T}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{c}{eB\mathrm{cos}\theta }}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega }{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2q}{(2\pi )^2}𝑑z𝑑z^{}\frac{q_y^2N(\omega )}{1\mathrm{exp}(\omega /T)}}`$ (7)
$`\times `$ $`[D_R(\omega ;𝐪;z,z^{})D_A(\omega ;𝐪;z,z^{})][\mathrm{\Pi }_R^{(3)}(\omega ;𝐪;z^{},z)\mathrm{\Pi }_A^{(3)}(\omega ;𝐪;z^{},z)]`$ (8)
(see the details of the derivation in Ref. ). We made use of the quasimomentum conservation along the plane of the quantum well; $`𝐪`$ is a 2D wave vector parallel to the plane of the well. $`N(\omega )`$ is the Bose function. $`\mathrm{\Pi }_R^{(3)}(\omega ;𝐪;z^{},z)`$ is the exact 3D electron polarization operator.

Now, $`D_R(\omega ;𝐪;z,z^{})`$ is the phonon propagator with regard of the direct Coulomb electron-electron (e-e) interaction \[see below Eq. (11)\]. In the present paper we consider the magnetophonon resonant contribution to $`\sigma _{xx}`$. This means that the phonon contribution to the Green function $`D_R`$ is determined by the optic phonons. Further on we will assume that one can neglect the difference between the lattice properties within and outside the well. This assumption should not affect the qualitative results of the theory. \[Eq. (8) permits to consider also a more general (nonhomogeneous) case\]. Without regard of e-e interaction the phonon propagator has the form

$$D_{R,A}^{(0)}(\omega )=\frac{4\pi e^2}{(q^2+k^2)\epsilon _c}\frac{\omega _l}{2}\left(\frac{1}{\omega \omega _l\pm i\delta }\frac{1}{\omega +\omega _l\pm i\delta }\right)$$
(9)
where $`k`$ is the $`z`$-component of the wave vector while $`\epsilon _c`$ is given by

$$\frac{1}{\epsilon _c}=\frac{1}{\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}}\frac{1}{\epsilon _0}.$$
(10)
Here $`\epsilon _0`$ and $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}`$ are the dielectric susceptibilities for $`\omega 0`$ and $`\omega \mathrm{}`$, respectively. We have included the Frölich electron-phonon interaction  into the definition of the zero-order phonon Green function.

When calculating the exact phonon propagator it will be necessary to insert along with the phonon lines $`D_{R,A}^{(0)}`$ the direct Coulomb interaction lines

$$V^{(C)}(𝐪,k)=\frac{4\pi e^2}{\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}(q^2+k^2)}.$$
(11)
One should, however, observe the following important point. Both ends of the exact phonon propagator should be ordinary phonon lines $`D^{(0)}`$ without Coulomb interaction lines. This is due to the fact that the operator $`X`$ commutes with the electron-electron interaction operator \[see Eq. (5)\] as the latter conserves the electron quasimomentum.

Further we assume for the electrons a parabolic confining potential $`m\omega _0^2z^2/2`$ with the following gauge for the vector potential $`𝐀=(By\mathrm{cos}\theta +Bz\mathrm{sin}\theta ,0,0)`$. It is also assumed that

$$\mathrm{}\omega _0\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega },k_\mathrm{B}T$$
(12)
(where $`\mathrm{\Omega }=eB/mc`$ is the cyclotron frequency). In other words, we assume the confining potential to be strong. The diagonalization of quadratic Hamiltonian is a well-known procedure (for instance, Ref. ). We wish, however, to emphasize that the actual form of the confining potential is not essential for the present theory provided that $`\mathrm{}\omega _l`$ is much smaller than the distance to the bottom of the second miniband \[see below — Eq. (16)\].

The energy of confined electron in the magnetic field defined by the vector potential $`𝐀`$ is

$$𝒰=\frac{1}{2}m\mathrm{\Omega }^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta (yy_0)^2\frac{1}{2}m\mathrm{\Omega }^2\mathrm{sin}(2\theta )z(yy_0)+\frac{1}{2}m(\omega _0^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta )z^2$$
(13)
where $`y_0=cp_x/eB\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ while $`p_x`$ is the electron quasimomentum component that is conserved. We will see in Appendix that in the leading order in $`(\mathrm{\Omega }/\omega _0)^2`$ one can retain in Eq. (13) only the terms describing the electron motion in the magnetic field $`B\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ perpendicular to the plane of the well (cf. with Ref. ). This can be visualized in the following way. One can obviously neglect the magnetic field correction to the confinement potential, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta `$ as compared to $`\omega _0^2`$. This means that the characteristic values of $`z`$ are of the order of $`l=\sqrt{\mathrm{}/\omega _0m}`$. The mixed term, i.e. the second term on the right-hand side of Eq. (13) for the typical values of $`z`$ can be also discarded provided that $`\mathrm{}\omega _0`$ is the biggest energy in our problem. Therefore the 2D polarization operator (calculated in detail in Appendix) for the case of Boltzmann statistics and a small gas parameter we are interested in has the same structure as the polarization operator of Ref.  in the perpendicular field $`B`$ with the replacement $`BB\mathrm{cos}\theta `$:

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_R=2n_s\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{(qa_B)^2\mathrm{coth}\alpha }{2\mathrm{cos}\theta }\right]\underset{𝒩=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\mathrm{sinh}𝒩\alpha }{\omega 𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta +i\delta }I_𝒩\left(\frac{q^2a_B^2}{2\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sinh}\alpha }\right).$$
(14)
Here $`I_𝒩`$ is the modified Bessel function, $`\alpha =\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta /2k_\mathrm{B}T`$, $`a_B^2=c\mathrm{}/eB`$, $`n_s`$ is the 2D electron concentration. The polarization operator $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{(3)}`$ of Eq. (8) differs from $`\mathrm{\Pi }_R`$ by the factor $`\psi (z)^2\psi (z^{})^2`$ due to the electron motion along the $`z`$-axis. Here $`\psi (z)`$ is the wave function of the lowest level of transverse quantization.

The e-e interaction can take place both via exchange of a phonon and as a direct interaction described by $`V^{(C)}`$, Eq. (11). The sum of two interactions is

$$V_{R,A}(𝐪,k)=\frac{4\pi e^2}{(q^2+k^2)\epsilon _{R,A}(\omega )},\epsilon _{R,A}(\omega )=\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}\frac{\omega _l^2(\omega \pm i\delta )^2}{\omega _t^2(\omega \pm i\delta )^2}.$$
(15)
Here $`\omega _t^2=\omega _l^2(1\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}/\epsilon _c)`$.

Eq. (14) shows that the electron-electron interaction cannot be treated within the perturbation theory. Let the frequency $`\omega `$ in Eq. (14) be close to the frequency $`𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ so that only one term of the series is important. The higher orders of the perturbation theory (without regard of the electron damping $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$) give powers of an extra factor $`1/(\omega 𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta +i\delta )`$. Therefore, the e-e interaction must be a sum of chains of loop diagrams (see Ref. ). Physically this means taking into account the screening of phonon polarization potential by the conduction electrons. Thus in 2D case in a resonance the screening can be very important. The reason as to why one does not need to take the screening into account in 3D case has been discussed in Ref. . The only point demanding some attention is taking into account the spatial nonhomogeneity. However, the procedure is essentially facilitated by the fact that $`\mathrm{\Pi }(z_1,z_2)`$ depends on $`\psi (z_1)^2\psi (z_2)^2`$ as factors. Then the index of the progression generated by the loops is proportional to

$$𝑑z_1𝑑z_2V_R(𝐪,z_1z_2)\psi ^2(z_1)\psi ^2(z_2)$$
(16)
that can be presented in the form

$$\frac{dk}{2\pi }V_R(𝐪,k)\left[\frac{ds}{2\pi }\psi _s\psi _{s+k}\right]^2$$

where $`\psi _s`$ is the Fourier component of $`\psi (z)`$. This result is valid for a well of any form so far as the distance to the bottom of the second miniband remains much bigger than $`\mathrm{}\omega _l`$. It is only necessary to insert into Eq. (16) the appropriate wave function $`\psi (z)`$.

For a quadratic confining potential we get a theory of 2D electrons with the interaction potential

$$V_R(\omega ,𝐪)=\frac{4\pi e^2}{\epsilon _R(\omega )}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{\mathrm{exp}(k^2l^2/2)}{k^2+q^2}.$$
(17)
Further on we will also need the expression

$$V^{(C)}(𝐪)=\frac{4\pi e^2}{\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{\mathrm{exp}(k^2l^2/2)}{k^2+q^2}$$
(18)
as well as the equation for the exact phonon Green function

$$𝒟_R(\omega ,𝐪)=\frac{V_R(\omega ,𝐪)}{1+V_R(\omega ,𝐪)\mathrm{\Pi }_R(\omega ,𝐪)}.$$
(19)
Now we take into account the aforementioned point that both ends of the chain in Eq. (8) should be ordinary phonon lines (without the Coulomb interaction). We have

$$D_R(\omega ,𝐪)=D_R^{(0)}(\omega ,𝐪)+D_R^{(0)}(\omega ,𝐪)\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Pi }_R^1V_R(\omega ,𝐪)}D_R^{(0)}(\omega ,𝐪)$$
(20)
where

$$D_R^{(0)}(\omega ,𝐪)=\frac{dk}{2\pi }D_R^{(0)}(\omega ,𝐪,k)\mathrm{exp}(k^2l^2/2)$$
(21)
and a purely 2D equation for the MPR

$`\sigma _{xx}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4T}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{c}{B\mathrm{cos}\theta }}\right)^2{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega }{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2q}{(2\pi )^2}\frac{q^2N(\omega )}{1\mathrm{exp}(\omega /T)}}`$ (22)
$`\times `$ $`[D_R(\omega ;𝐪)D_A(\omega ;𝐪)][\mathrm{\Pi }_R(\omega ;𝐪)\mathrm{\Pi }_A(\omega ;𝐪)].`$ (23)
Here we made use of the fact that for $`\mathrm{}\omega _0\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ the integrand in Eq. (23) is symmetric in $`q_x`$ and $`q_y`$.

We will not insert directly Eq. (20) into Eq. (23) as it seems to have poles at $`\omega =\omega _l`$ that in fact disappear after integration and some algebra. It is convenient instead to present Eq. (20) in the form

$$D_R(\omega ,𝐪)=𝒟_R(\omega ,𝐪)V^{(C)}+\frac{2V^{(C)}V_R(𝐪)}{\mathrm{\Pi }_R^1+V_R(𝐪)}\frac{\left(V^{(C)}\right)^2}{\mathrm{\Pi }_R^1+V_R(𝐪)}.$$
(24)
One can see that neither of these terms has a pole $`\omega =\omega _l`$ \[see Eq. (17) in combination with Eq. (15)\]. This is a manifestation of the influence of screening. It means that the screening may play a certain role even for relatively small electron concentrations.

The MPR is, as we will see, determined by the last term while the contribution of all the rest terms in Eq. (23) vanishes (provided that one neglects the electron and phonon damping). As a result, we have for the $`𝒩`$th resonance of $`\sigma _{xx}`$

$$\sigma _{xx}=\frac{2n_sc^2\mathrm{}^2}{\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}k_\mathrm{B}TB^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }\frac{N(\omega _t)\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{}\omega _t/2k_\mathrm{B}T)}{1\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{}\omega _t/k_\mathrm{B}T)}𝒥_𝒩\delta [1/\epsilon (𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta )]$$
(25)
where

$$𝒥_𝒩=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑qq^3V^{(C)}(q)I_𝒩\left(\frac{a_B^2q^2}{2\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sinh}\alpha }\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a_B^2q^2\mathrm{coth}\alpha }{2\mathrm{cos}\theta }\right).$$
(26)
As is indicated in Sec. I, it is natural that in the lowest approximation in $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2/\omega _0^2`$ only the combination $`B\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ enters the equations describing the 2D motion of an electron in the quantum well. The integrals in the rest terms in Eq. (24) are either real or proportional to $`\epsilon ^1\delta (\epsilon ^1)`$. This can be easily checked if one takes into consideration that $`\delta (\epsilon ^1)`$ comes from the pole $`[\mathrm{\Pi }_R^1+V_R(𝐪)]^1`$ and the terms in question in Eq. (24) have the factor $`\epsilon ^1`$.

Further we will be interested in the case $`ql1`$ when the effective e-e interaction does not depend on the form of potential and is equal to

$$V^{(C)}(q)=\frac{2\pi e^2}{\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}q}.$$
(27)
Then one can present $`𝒥_𝒩`$ as

$$𝒥_𝒩=\frac{4i\sqrt{\pi }e^2}{\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}a_B^3}\mathrm{cos}^{3/2}\theta \mathrm{sinh}^{1/2}\left(\frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta }{2k_\mathrm{B}T}\right)Q_{𝒩1/2}^1\left(\mathrm{cosh}\frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta }{2k_\mathrm{B}T}\right)$$
(28)
where $`Q_{𝒩1/2}^1(z)`$ is the associated Legendre function of the second kind (we remind that $`Q_{𝒩1/2}^1`$ is an imaginary function of a real argument). We will consider the case $`\alpha 1`$. Then the characteristic values of $`q`$ are of the order of $`q_T=\sqrt{2mk_\mathrm{B}T}/\mathrm{}`$ and one can present $`𝒥_𝒩`$ in the following form

$$𝒥_𝒩=\frac{4\sqrt{2\pi }e^2\mathrm{cos}\theta }{\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}a_B^3}\sqrt{\frac{k_\mathrm{B}T}{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }}}.$$
(29)
As $`\epsilon ^1(\omega )`$ \[Eq. (15)\] has a zero at $`\omega =\omega _t`$, $`\sigma _{xx}`$ exhibits in this approximation an infinitely narrow magnetophonon resonance at

$$𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta =\omega _t.$$
(30)
Physically this is due to the fact that the e-e interaction without regard of the damping is very strong in the resonance.

## III Angular dependence of MPR maxima

In the present section we will investigate dependence of the positions of the MPR maxima on the angle $`\theta `$. As we have indicated, in the limit of vanishing phonon and electron damping ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$, respectively) the screening in the resonance is very strong. If we take into account that the dampings are finite one can calculate the critical concentration $`n_s`$ where the screening ceases to play a role. As the interaction depends also on $`\theta `$ for each value of $`n_s`$ one can indicate the corresponding critical value(s) of $`\theta `$.

We will start with taking into account the phonon damping. Finite optic phonon damping is due to the decay of an optic phonon into two acoustic ones (see ). Technically it can be taken into account by replacement $`\omega \omega \pm i\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in the retarded and advanced phonon Green functions, respectively. One can easily see that in such a case the MPR acquires a finite width which one can take into account by the following replacement in Eq. (25)

$$\delta (\epsilon ^1)\frac{1}{\pi }\mathrm{Im}\epsilon _R.$$
(31)
Here

$$\frac{1}{\pi }\mathrm{Im}\epsilon _R=\frac{\omega _l^2\omega _t^2}{2\pi \omega _t}\frac{\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\left(𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta \sqrt{\omega _t^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}\right)^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}.$$
(32)
In what follows we will assume that

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_e,\mathrm{\Gamma }\omega _l\omega _t\omega _t.$$
(33)
One needs the first inequality to be able to discriminate between frequencies $`\omega _l`$ and $`\omega _t`$. The second inequality is fulfilled for such systems as GaAs/GaAlAs and facilitates the calculations.

Now we will discuss the role of the electron damping. Good examples of importance of the damping for the MPR are given in Refs. . For us it is important as it may both destroy the resonance and determine the angular interval for its existence we are looking for. We assume that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. The electron Green function in magnetic field has been investigated by Ando and Uemura  and in more detail by Laikhtman and E. Altshuler  for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$ determined by an elastic short range scattering. In the case we are particularly interested in, i.e. GaAs the temperature variation of mobility from the liquid helium temperature to the temperature of experiment (about 200K) is substantial (in the typical cases, at least, by several times). It means that the acoustic phonon scattering (that can be considered as short range elastic) should be predominant. It was shown in Refs.  that in this case the electron Green function has a non-Lorentzian form with the characteristic width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$ given by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_e=\mathrm{\Gamma }_e^{(0)}\sqrt{\mathrm{cos}\theta },\mathrm{\Gamma }_e^{(0)}=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }/2\pi \tau }$$
(34)
where $`\tau `$ is the relaxation time for $`B=0`$ obtained by assuming the same scatterers as for a finite $`B`$.

Further on our formulas should be considered as order-of-magnitude estimates giving the correct dependencies on the parameters, though not the parameter-independent numerical coefficients of the order of unity. For such estimates it will be sufficient to use the Lorentzian form of $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\omega ,𝐪)`$. As has been indicated, in the resonance approximation one should retain only the resonant term of all the series (14) for $`\mathrm{\Pi }_R(\omega ,𝐪)`$

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_R(\omega ,𝐪)=\frac{_𝒩(\omega ,𝐪)}{\omega 𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta +i\mathrm{\Gamma }_e}$$
(35)
where $`_𝒩`$ is the residue at the pole $`\omega =𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta i\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$. Calculating $`\sigma _{xx}`$ one can evaluate the integral over the frequencies taking the residues in the poles $`\omega =𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta \pm i\mathrm{\Gamma }_e`$. To get the result one should remove the factor $`\delta (\epsilon ^1)`$ in Eq. (25) and insert instead into the integrand of Eq. (26)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\frac{1}{\pi }\frac{\mathrm{Im}\epsilon _A^1+2\gamma }{(2\gamma +\mathrm{Im}\epsilon _A^1)^2+(\mathrm{Re}\epsilon _A^1)^2}$$
(36)
where

$$\gamma =\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_e}{\overline{\omega }};\overline{\omega }=\frac{2\pi e^2}{q}_𝒩(𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta ,𝐪)$$

while $`\epsilon _A`$ should be calculated at $`\omega =𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta +i(\mathrm{\Gamma }+\mathrm{\Gamma }_e)`$. One can see that integral (26) is dominated by the values of $`q`$ where the asymptotic expansion of the Bessel function is valid, so that

$$_𝒩=\frac{\sqrt{2}n_s}{\sqrt{\pi }}\frac{𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }{Tqa_B}\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{T}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{q^2}{4q_T^2}\right).$$
(37)
We remind the reader that Eq. (25) is derived within the so-called RPA (loop) approximation \[see Eq. (20)\] as it takes into account the resonant interaction of electrons with optic phonons. Such resonant terms should probably be added also to the vertex parts describing the polaron effects. These terms may be essential in the magnetophonon maxima. However, we are looking for the critical values of the parameters such as electron concentration where the resonant interaction disappears, so that the MPR signal sharply goes down. In such a situation the polaron effects should be also suppressed. Thus we believe that our theory, though probably not permitting the exact calculation of the MPR amplitude, still gives the correct characteristic values of the electron concentrations and the angles where the MPR signal rapidly decreases.

In the present paper we limit ourselves with the sufficiently low concentrations $`n_s`$ where the MPR maxima are well defined. As is shown in Ref. , an additional mechanism of electron level broadening due to the electron-electron interaction appears at high electron concentration \[see Eq. (6.10) of Ref. )\]. Here we consider the concentrations that are not so large that one would have to take into consideration this effect.

For small values of $`\gamma `$ Eq. (36) turns into $`\mathrm{Im}\epsilon _R(\omega _t)`$ as one can neglect the terms $`2\gamma `$. When $`\gamma `$ has reached the critical value $`(1/2)|\epsilon _A^1(\omega _t)|`$ the amplitude of the maximum begins to go down. This condition can be written as

$$2\gamma \mathrm{Im}\left(\epsilon _A\right)^1.$$
(38)
for

$$𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta =\omega _t.$$
(39)
Under the MPR condition (39) $`\mathrm{Im}\left(\epsilon _A\right)^1`$ is small. Therefore even a small variation of the quantities determining $`\gamma `$ can violate Eq. (38). The screening is important provided that the parameter

$$\beta \mathrm{Im}\left[\epsilon _A(𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta +i\mathrm{\Gamma }_e+i\mathrm{\Gamma })\right]^1/2\gamma $$
(40)
is bigger than (or of the order of) unity. If it is much bigger than unity the screening is strong and the result is independent of $`\beta `$. The MPR maxima become $`\beta `$-dependent when $`\beta `$ is of the order of unity. Then a relatively small variation of $`\beta `$ might drastically change the result (see Figs. 4 and 5 of Ref. ). To achieve such a change one needs a variation of $`\beta `$ that need not be large.

Let us follow a variation of the MPR signal as a function of $`\theta `$. One can write for an arbitrary magnetic field $`B(\theta )`$ that is near the $`𝒩`$th resonance value $`B_𝒩(\theta )`$

$$B(\theta )=B_𝒩(\theta )+\mathrm{\Delta }B.$$
(41)
$`B_𝒩(0)=\mathrm{}\omega _tmc/e𝒩`$ is the position of the $`𝒩`$th MPR maximum for $`\theta =0`$. The field corresponding to the $`𝒩`$th resonance, varies for finite values of $`\theta `$ according to

$$B_𝒩(\theta )\mathrm{cos}\theta =B_𝒩(0).$$
(42)
Thus the MPR amplitudes for various angles $`\theta `$ (and the same resonance number $`𝒩`$) correspond to the same value of $`\beta `$ and therefore should coincide. (Only the width of the maximum should enhance with decrease of $`\theta `$). This conclusion of the theory is in drastic disagreement with the experiment .

We think that this is due to the assumption that the electron concentration $`n_s`$ is a constant independent of $`B`$. It is known, however, that in the course of temperature variation from 77 K to 300 K at $`B=0`$ the variation of the carrier concentration may comprise several tens per cent. This means that the energy variation of some donors on the scale of the order of hundred K, or so noticeably shifts the electron concentration balance between the donors and the well.

Let us give a rough estimate of the variation of impurity level positions as a function of $`B`$. If one assumes a hydrogen-like states the variation $`\delta ϵ`$ of their lowest level position $`ϵ(B)`$ under the shift of magnetic field $`\delta B`$ is (for instance, , section 112)

$$\delta ϵ\frac{\delta B}{B}\frac{|ϵ(B)|}{2\mathrm{ln}[\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }(B)/ϵ_0]}$$
(43)
where $`ϵ_0=me^4/2\mathrm{}^2\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}^2`$ is the Bohr energy while $`ϵ(B)`$ is the position of the level in magnetic field $`B`$, mark that $`ϵ(B)<0`$. This is a lower estimate as with the overlap of atomic orbits the influence of the magnetic field should enhance. As in our case $`\mathrm{ln}[\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }(B)/ϵ_0]`$ is, roughly, of the order of unity we will accept the estimate $`\delta ϵ/ϵ\delta B/B`$. This should result in redistribution of electrons between the donors and the well. In other words, the electron concentration in the well will decrease (see below). The chemical potential $`\mu `$ can be obtained from the equation

$$N_i=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mu }{k_\mathrm{B}T}\right)\left\{N_i\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{ϵ_i(B)}{k_\mathrm{B}T}\right]+\frac{S}{2\pi a_B^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }\underset{L}{}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }_L(B\mathrm{cos}\theta )}{k_\mathrm{B}T}\right]\right\}$$
(44)
where $`N_i`$ is the total number of donors. Further on we will assume that the number of electrons bound to the donors is much bigger than in the well. This seems to be a rather typical experimental situation. Practically the actual form of the impurity states and the distribution of impurity levels may be (and usually is) much more complicated. What is actually relevant to bring about a variation of the electron concentration $`n_s`$ in the well is the magnetic field dependence of the positions of impurity levels in the proper interval of energies.

The variation of electron concentration for the values of $`B`$ given by Eq. (42) is

$$\frac{\delta n_s}{n_s(B)}=\xi \frac{\delta B}{B}\text{with}\xi =\frac{ϵ(B)/k_\mathrm{B}T}{1+n_s(B)/n_i(B)}$$
(45)
where $`n_i(B)`$ is the 2D concentration of the electrons bound by the donors. It will be natural to assume below for the estimates that $`|\xi |`$ is of the order of unity.

It is convenient to present $`\beta `$ as a ratio of the electron concentrations to some characteristic value

$$\beta =n_s(B)/n_{\mathrm{down}}$$
(46)
where

$$\frac{1}{n_{\mathrm{down}}}=\frac{\sqrt{2\pi }\mathrm{}e^3\omega _tB_𝒩(0)}{\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}q_TT^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_emc}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_e+\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\omega _l\omega _t}.$$
(47)
$`n_{\mathrm{down}}`$ is the lower critical concentration where the screening ceases to play a role. For $`𝒩`$=3 in GaAs its characteristic value is about 10<sup>10</sup> cm<sup>-2</sup>. Equation (47) differs from the equation for $`n_{\mathrm{down}}`$ given in Ref.  as we have assumed there $`q_Ta_B^1`$ and $`\mathrm{}\omega _t2k_\mathrm{B}T`$ that is valid for GaAs under certain conditions and may differ for other situations.

The parameter $`\beta `$ depends on the electron concentration $`n_s`$. This fact permits one to compare the dependence of the MPR amplitudes in perpendicular magnetic field under the variation of concentration (i.e., in different samples) and the angular dependence of the MPR maxima under variation of $`\theta `$. This will permit to check as to whether the magnetic field induced variation of $`n_s`$ is sufficient to explain the decrease of the MPR amplitude as a function of $`\theta `$ on the one hand and the existence of the subsidiary (side) maximum in the angular dependence of the MPR amplitude on the other hand (see Ref. ).

We start with discussion of the behavior of the MPR amplitude under magnetic field rotation at small angles $`\theta 1`$. We will consider the concentration interval $`n_sn_{\mathrm{down}}`$ where there is a sharp dependence of the MPR amplitude on $`\beta `$. According to Eq. (42) the MPR maximum will shift by

$$\delta B_𝒩B_𝒩(0)(1\mathrm{cos}\theta ).$$
(48)
This will result in the relative variation of concentration $`\delta n_s/n_s\xi (1\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$ that manifests itself in the angular dependence of the MPR amplitude. As is known from the experiment in the perpendicular magnetic field, in this region of concentrations when $`n_s`$ goes down it brings about a sharp decease of the amplitude.

As a reasoning supporting our view we will consider the following numerical example. According to Ref. , Fig. 6 the variation of the MPR amplitude is about 60 % provided the concentration varies within the interval from 1.8$``$10<sup>10</sup> cm<sup>-2</sup> to 2$``$10<sup>10</sup> cm<sup>-2</sup>. The same decrease of the amplitude induced by magnetic field should take place for $`\delta n_s/n_s0.1`$, i.e. for $`\theta `$ of the order of 20. This shows an order-of-magnitude correspondence with the results of Ref. . Further increase of $`\theta `$ gets the system into the region where $`n<n_{\mathrm{down}}`$ and a well defined resonant peak with the resonant condition (39) disappears.

The behavior of this sort takes place provided that $`\beta \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}1`$. For such concentrations where $`\beta 1`$ small variation of this parameter does not play an essential role. This means that for the samples that have a maximal MPR amplitude ($`n_s5`$10<sup>10</sup> cm<sup>-2</sup>) its $`\theta `$ dependence should be absent.

Now we will treat the region of large angles. Consider the samples with the concentration of the order of $`n_{\mathrm{down}}`$. The angle $`\theta `$ going up, $`n_s`$ can become so small that the perturbation approach becomes applicable. In other words, one observes the resonance determined by the condition

$$𝒩\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta =\omega _l.$$
(49)
The screening is not important provided that $`\beta <1`$. In view of Eq. (49) one should insert in (40) $`\epsilon _A(\omega _l+i\mathrm{\Gamma }_e+i\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. As a result, one can write

$$\beta _l=\frac{n_s(\theta )}{n_{\mathrm{down}}}\left(\frac{\omega _l\omega _t}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_e+\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right)^2.$$
(50)
If the last factor in this equation is large enough one needs rather small concentrations $`n_s(\theta )`$. Let us estimate the angles where they can be achieved. It follows from Eq. (44) under the same assumptions provided that $`\delta B/B`$ is not small

$$n_s(\delta B+B)=n_s(B)\mathrm{exp}(\delta ϵ/k_\mathrm{B}T).$$
(51)
Very rough estimates in the spirit of Ref.  give \[the dependence $`ϵ(B)`$ is rather smooth and we believe that its expansion up to the linear term can be justified\]

$$\delta ϵ\zeta ϵ_0\left(\frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }}{ϵ_0}\right)=\zeta \mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }$$
(52)
where $`\zeta `$ is a number of the order of unity. This estimate is based on the idea that the level shift depends on a single parameter, i.e. the ratio of the magnetic energy to the Coulomb one (cf. the analytical treatment of the hydrogen atom in magnetic field in Ref. , §112).

Thus the discussed $`\omega _l`$-maximum exists for the angles bigger than $`\theta _c`$ given by the equation

$$\mathrm{sec}\theta _c\frac{1}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{4}+\frac{2𝒩k_\mathrm{B}T}{\zeta \mathrm{}\omega _l}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\omega _l\omega _t}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_e+\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right)}.$$
(53)
The second term under the sign of root is, most probably, of the order of unity. In this case $`\theta `$ is somewhere in the interval between 40 and 70, or so. Thus in the regions of small and large angles we have well-defined $`\omega _t`$ and $`\omega _l`$-resonances, respectively. Their positions depend on $`B\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. In the intermediate interval of angles there are no well-defined MPR maxima.

It is interesting to note that in the region of small angles the width of a maximum goes up with the number of resonance $`𝒩`$. It can be easily seen if one takes into consideration enhancement of $`n_s`$ with decrease of magnetic field as well as enhancement of $`n_c`$ with $`𝒩`$. All these conclusions are in a qualitative agreement with the results described in Ref. .

## IV Conclusion

To summarize, we would like to stress that the interpretation of behavior of the MPR in a tilted magnetic field has been a long-standing problem . Two types of resonant maxima have been discovered on experiment, i.e. the $`\omega _t`$\- and $`\omega _l`$-resonances as their positions are determined by the frequencies $`\omega _t`$ and $`\omega _l`$, respectively.

Important points to provide theoretical interpretation of these resonances are the dependence of all quantities characterizing the 2D motion of electrons on the combination $`B\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ whereas their total concentration in the well depends on $`B`$. Had only the $`B\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ dependence existed, the amplitude of the resonances, i.e. the heights of the maxima would have been independent of the angle $`\theta `$. We think that the only way to preserve the theory of 2D electron gas describing the concentration dependence of the MPR is to assume variation of the electron concentration with $`B`$. It manifests itself in the angular dependence of the MPR amplitude. In this way we have been able to give a qualitative interpretation of the results given in Ref. .

## Acknowledgements

V. V. A. and V. L. G. acknowledge support for this work by the Academy of Finland, the Wihuri Foundation, and the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, Grant No 00-15-96748.

## Calculation of polarization operator

As indicated in Sec. II, we assume for the electrons a parabolic confining potential $`m\omega _0^2z^2/2`$ with the gauge for the vector potential $`𝐀=(By\mathrm{cos}\theta +Bz\mathrm{sin}\theta ,0,0)`$. In spite of the first inequality (12), it is convenient to look for the exact transformation of the Hamiltonian and solution of the Schrödinger equation and only then go to the limit

$$\mathrm{\Omega }/\omega _01.$$
(54)
Applying a standard procedure of diagonalization we get for the bigger eigenvalue

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2=\omega _0^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2\mathrm{\Omega }_c^2$$
(55)
while the smaller eigenvalue is

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_c^2=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\omega _0^2}{2}\left[1\sqrt{1\frac{4\mathrm{\Omega }^2\omega _0^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }{(\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\omega _0^2)^2}}\right].$$
(56)
The variables ($`Y,Z`$) diagonalizing the Hamiltonian are expressible through the initial variables ($`y,z`$) as

$$\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{Y}{Z}\right)=\frac{1}{C}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{yy_0rz}{r(yy_0)+z}\right).$$
(57)
Here $`C=1/\sqrt{1+r^2}`$,

$$r=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_c^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta }{\mathrm{\Omega }^2\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta }.$$

As a result, we get two noninteracting oscillators, i.e. the $`Y`$-oscillator and the $`Z`$-oscillator

$$=\frac{1}{2m}\frac{^2}{Y^2}\frac{1}{2m}\frac{^2}{Z^2}+\frac{m}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_c^2Y^2+\frac{m}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2Z^2.$$
(58)
We are interested in the eigenfrequency of the $`Y`$-oscillator that is

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_c=\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta $$
(59)
plus small terms proportional to $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2/\omega _0^21`$. The eigenfrequency of the $`Z`$-oscillator is equal to $`\omega _0`$ (with the same accuracy).

Now we turn to calculation of the polarization operator for nondegenerate free electrons in magnetic field by a slight modification of the method proposed by Sondheimer and Wilson . The method is based on the spectral representation (see Sec. 36 ).

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_R(\omega ,z^{},z)=\underset{m,l}{}w_l\frac{m|\widehat{n}(0,z^{})|ll|\widehat{n}(0,z)|m}{\omega \omega _{lm}+i\delta }[1\mathrm{exp}(\omega _{lm}/T)].$$
(60)
Sondheimer and Wilson introduced a Green function of a complex time argument $`\gamma `$

$$G(𝐫,𝐫^{},\gamma )=\underset{\beta }{}\psi _\beta ^{}(𝐫^{})\psi _\beta (𝐫)\mathrm{exp}\left(\epsilon _\beta \gamma \right),\mathrm{Re}\gamma >0.$$
(61)
Here $`\beta `$ is the set of all quantum numbers of an electron, while $`\epsilon _\beta `$ is the energy of the quantum state $`\beta `$. One can express the polarization operator through the Green functions of a complex time argument.

The retarded polarization operator for Hamiltonian (58) is

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_R^{(3)}(𝐫,𝐫^{},t)`$ $`=`$ $`2i\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_2+\mathrm{\Omega }_c}{2T}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{T}}\right)\mathrm{\Theta }(t)`$ (62)
$`\times `$ $`\left[G(𝐫^{},𝐫,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}it)G(𝐫,𝐫^{},it)G(𝐫^{},𝐫,it)G(𝐫,𝐫^{},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}+it)\right].`$ (63)
Here $`\psi _\beta (𝐫)`$ is a product of the eigenfunctions of the $`Y`$\- and $`Z`$-oscillators, $`\mathrm{\Theta }(t)`$ is the step function.

In order to sum up the series in Eq. (61) over the $`Y`$\- and $`Z`$-oscillator quantum numbers we will use the following relation

$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2^nn!}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(y^2+y_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})n\gamma \omega \right]H_n(y)H_n(y^{})`$ (64)
$`=\left(1e^{2\gamma \omega }\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(y+y^{})^2{\displaystyle \frac{1e^{\gamma \omega }}{1+e^{\gamma \omega }}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(yy^{})^2{\displaystyle \frac{1+e^{\gamma \omega }}{1e^{\gamma \omega }}}\right]`$ (65)
where $`H_n(y)`$ is the Hermite polynomial. It is convenient to replace the summation over the quantum number $`p_x`$ by integration over $`y_0`$.

Now,

$$G(𝐫,𝐫^{},\gamma )=\frac{a_1CeB\mathrm{cos}\theta }{\sqrt{\pi }a_2}\left(\mathrm{sinh}\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_c\mathrm{sinh}\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_0\right)^{1/2}\left(\mathrm{tanh}\frac{\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_c}{2}+\frac{a_1^2r^2}{a_2^2}\mathrm{tanh}\frac{\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_0}{2}\right)^{1/2}$$

$$\times \mathrm{exp}\{\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_c}{2}\right)(\mathrm{\Delta }Y)^2\frac{a_1^2}{4a_2^2}\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_0}{2}\right)(\mathrm{\Delta }Z)^2\frac{1}{4}b_1^2\mathrm{tanh}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_0\gamma }{2}\right)(z+z^{})^2$$

$$\frac{1}{4}\frac{C^2\left[\mathrm{\Delta }x+ib\mathrm{tanh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_0\gamma /2)(z+z^{})\right]^2}{\mathrm{tanh}(\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_c/2)+(a_1^2r^2/a_2^2)\mathrm{tanh}(\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_0/2)}\}.$$
(66)
Here

$$b=\frac{a_1^2r}{a_2^2},b_1=\frac{b}{r};$$
(67)
the variables in Eq. (66) are made dimensionless by the transformations

$$\mathrm{\Delta }Y=(YY^{})/a_1,\mathrm{\Delta }Z=(ZZ^{})/a_1,zz/a_1,z^{}z^{}/a_1$$
(68)
where

$$a_1^2=1/m\mathrm{\Omega }_c,a_2^2=1/m\mathrm{\Omega }_0.$$
(69)
To calculate the polarization operator it is convenient to use the Green functions in the momentum representation. After rather involved but straightforward calculations we get

$$\mathrm{\Pi }^{(3)}(𝐪,q_z,Q_z,t)=P(𝐪,q_z,Q_z,t)+P^{}(𝐪,q_z,Q_z,t)$$
(70)
where the asterisk means a complex conjugation;

$`P(𝐪,q_z,Q_z,t)={\displaystyle \frac{2iCa_1B^2\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_c+\mathrm{\Omega }_0}{2T}}\mathrm{\Theta }(t)e^{\mu /T}}{\pi a_2\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_c/2T)\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_0/2T)}}\mathrm{exp}\{(q_y^2+{\displaystyle \frac{q_x^2}{C^2}})g_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_c)`$ (71)
$`(q_z^2+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2q_x^2}{C^2}}){\displaystyle \frac{a_2^2}{a_1^2}}g_1(\mathrm{\Omega }_0){\displaystyle \frac{Q_z^2}{4C^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{a_2^2}{a_1^2}}g_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_0)+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{2}}g_2(\mathrm{\Omega }_c)]+{\displaystyle \frac{rq_xQ_z}{2C^2}}[g_3(\mathrm{\Omega }_c)g_3(\mathrm{\Omega }_0)]]\}`$ (72)
where

$$g_1(\mathrm{\Omega })=\frac{1}{2}\left[\mathrm{coth}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2T}\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }t+\frac{i\mathrm{\Omega }}{2T}\right)/\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2T}\right],$$

$$g_2(\mathrm{\Omega })=\frac{1}{2}\left[\mathrm{coth}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2T}+\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }t+\frac{i\mathrm{\Omega }}{2T}\right)/\mathrm{sinh}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2T}\right],$$

$$g_3(\mathrm{\Omega })=\frac{\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }(t+i/2T)}{\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }/2T)}.$$

Here $`𝐪`$ and $`q_z`$ refer to the Fourier components over the differences $`𝐫𝐫^{}`$ and $`zz^{}`$ while $`Q_z`$ is related to $`(z+z^{})/2`$.

We are looking for a frequency representation of the polarization operator. We are going to take into consideration only the lowest level of transverse quantization, i.e. the lowest miniband. At the first sight one could try to average Eq. (72) over the time interval bigger than $`1/\omega _0`$ but smaller than $`1/\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. However, some spurious terms can appear as a result of the direct averaging due to the even powers of $`\mathrm{sin}\omega _0t`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}\omega _0t`$. Therefore we will look for the frequency representation of the whole expression Eq. (72). One can find it with the help of the identities

$$\mathrm{exp}(z\mathrm{cos}A)=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{inA}I_n(z),\mathrm{exp}(z\mathrm{sin}A)=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{inA}J_n(iz).$$
(73)
where $`J_m`$ are the ordinary Bessel functions. Combining them with Eq. (72) one can see that $`A`$ is a linear function of time, so that one can easily calculate the Fourier components. Discarding the poles describing the transitions to the higher minibands one gets

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_R^{(3)}`$ $`=`$ $`2Cn_s\mathrm{exp}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{q_y^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{q_x^2}{2C^2}}\right)\mathrm{coth}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_c}{2T}}{\displaystyle \frac{Q_z^2}{C^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{a_2^2}{8a_1^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2}{8}}\mathrm{coth}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_c}{2T}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{a_2^2}{a_1^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q_z^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{r^2q_x^2}{2C^2}}\right)\right]`$ (74)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{lmn}{}}I_{n+l}\left({\displaystyle \frac{q_y^2+q_x^2/C^2}{2\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_c/2T)}}\right)I_{lm}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r^2Q_z^2}{8C^2\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_c/2T)}}\right)`$ (75)
$`\times `$ $`J_m\left({\displaystyle \frac{irq_xQ_z}{2C^2\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_c/2T)}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_cn/2T)}{\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_cn+i\delta }}.`$ (76)
There are elegant formulas to calculate this sum. However, as we are interested in the limiting case $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2/\omega _0^21`$ one can see the result immediately from Eq. (76). Indeed, the Bessel functions having in their arguments as a factor the small parameter $`r`$ can be discarded unless $`lm=m=0`$ and we are left with

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_R^{(3)}`$ $`=`$ $`2n_s\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{q_x^2+q_y^2}{2}}\mathrm{coth}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_c}{2T}}{\displaystyle \frac{a_2^2}{a_1^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{Q_z^2}{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{a_2^2}{a_1^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{q_z^2}{2}}\right]`$ (77)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}I_n\left({\displaystyle \frac{q_y^2+q_x^2}{2\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_c/2T)}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}\left(n\mathrm{\Omega }_c/2T\right)}{\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_cn+i\delta }}.`$ (78)
One can see that $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{(3)}`$ Eq. (78) coincides with $`\mathrm{\Pi }_R^{(3)}`$ of Eq. (8) and (14) if one takes into consideration that within the accepted approximation $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c=\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ and that we use in Eq. (78) dimensionless variables.