Suppressed compressibility of quantum Hall effect edge states in epitaxial graphene on SiC
Extracted source text · arXiv 1712.04957
%\documentclass[12pt]{article}
%\documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,showkeys,amsmath,amssymb,footinbib]{revtex=4}
%\documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex=4}
%\documentclass[preprint,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
% Some other (several out of many) possibilities
%\documentclass[preprint,aps]{revtex4}
%\documentclass[preprint,aps,draft]{revtex4}
\documentclass[aps,twocolumn,notitlepage,prb,10pt,showpacs, noeprint]{revtex4-1}
\synctex=1
%\usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
%\usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
\usepackage{bm}% bold math
\usepackage{textcomp}
%\usepackage{epsf}
%\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{url}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{amsxtra}
\usepackage{amscd}
\usepackage{amsthm}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{eucal}
\usepackage{latexsym,amsthm}
\usepackage{hhline}
\usepackage{multirow}% http://ctan.org/pkg/multirow
%\usepackage{axodraw4j}
\usepackage{pstricks}
\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
%\usepackage{showlabels}
\usepackage{enumitem}
%\usepackage[shortlabels]{enumerate}
%\usepackage[square,comma]{natbib}
%\usepackage{chapterbib}
%\usepackage{setspace}
%\setlength\bibsep{5pt}
%\usepackage{chapterbib}
%\usepackage{setspace}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%% User defined macros %%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newcommand{\nc}{\newcommand}
\nc{\on}{\operatorname}
%\nc{\ol}{\overline}
\nc{\wt}{\widetilde}
\nc{\Wick}{{\mathbb :}}
\nc{\R}{{\mathbb R}}
%\newcommand{\labelold}[1]{\label{#1}}
%\renewcommand{\label}[1]{\mbox{$\lefteqn{ \mbox{$\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; $\tiny #1}}$} \labelold{#1}}
\newcommand{\secref}[1]{Section~\ref{#1}}
\newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
\newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
\newcommand{\bmul}{\begin{multline}}
\newcommand{\emul}{{\end{multline}}}
\newcommand\beqa{\begin{eqnarray}}
\newcommand\eeqa{\end{eqnarray}}
\newcommand\bea{\begin{array}}
\newcommand\eea{\end{array}}
\newcommand\ba{\begin{array}}
\newcommand\ea{\end{array}}
\newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
\newcommand{\diag}[1]{{\rm diag}(#1)}
\newcommand{\neqa}{\nonumber\end{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\la}{{\lambda}}
\newcommand{\m}{{\mu}}
\newcommand{\pa}{{\partial}}
\newcommand{\vrho}{{\varrho}}
\newcommand{\vro}{{\varrho}}
\renewcommand{\P}{{\cal P}}
\newcommand{\p}{P}
\newcommand{\Pexp}{{\rm Pexp}}
\newcommand{\noi}{\noindent}
\newcommand{\eq}[1]{Eq. (\ref{#1})}
\newcommand{\eqs}[2]{eqs. (\ref{#1},\ref{#2})}
\newcommand{\Eq}[1]{Eq. (\ref{#1})}
\newcommand{\Eqs}[2]{Eqs. (\ref{#1}) and (\ref{#2})}
\newcommand{\ur}[1]{(\ref{#1})}
\newcommand{\urs}[2]{(\ref{#1},\ref{#2})}
\newcommand{\palpha}{{\dot{\alpha}}}
\newcommand{\pbeta}{{\dot{\beta}}}
\newcommand{\pgamma}{{\dot{\gamma}}}
\newcommand{\Tr}{{\rm Tr}}
\newcommand{\tr}{{\rm tr}}
\newcommand{\B}{{\cal B}}
\newcommand{\cv}{{\cal V}}
\newcommand{\Det}{{\rm Det}}
\newcommand{\half}{\frac{1}{2}}
\newcommand{\hf}{\frac{1}{2}}
\newcommand{\hs}{\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}}
\renewcommand{\d}{\partial}
\newcommand{\dbar}{\bar\partial}
\renewcommand{\O}{{\cal O}}
\newcommand{\C}{{\mathbb C}}
\renewcommand{\P}{{\mathbb P}}
\renewcommand{\L}{{\cal L}}
\newcommand{\Mfunction}[1]{#1}
\newcommand{\<}{{\langle}}
\renewcommand{\>}{{\rangle}}
\newcommand{\D}{{\mathcal D}}
\newcommand{\A}{{\hat{A}}}
\newcommand{\imag}{{i}}
\newcommand{\cA}{{\cal A}}
\nc{\CH}{{\mathcal H}}
\nc{\Db}{{\bar D}}
\nc\comment[1]{}
\newcommand{\cB}{{\cal B}}
\newcommand{\cM}{{\cal M}}
\nc{\CM}{{\mathcal M}}
\nc{\CN}{{\mathcal N}}
\newcommand{\bv}{\overline{{\rm v}}}
\newcommand{\Mphi}{\Phi}
\newcommand{\wh}{\widehat}
\renewcommand{\v}{{\rm v}}
\newcommand{\om}{\omega}
\newcommand{\re}{\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R}}
\newcommand{\qu}{{\rm I \! H}}
\newcommand{\sh}{{\rm sh_{\half}}}
\newcommand{\ch}{{\rm ch_{\half}}}
\newcommand{\bsh}{\overline{\sh}}
\newcommand{\bch}{\overline{\ch}}
\newcommand{\bshd}{\overline{\mathrm{sh}}\,}
\newcommand{\bchd}{\overline{\mathrm{ch}}\,}
\newcommand{\shd}{\mathrm{sh}\,}
\newcommand{\chd}{\mathrm{ch}\,}
\newcommand{\etab}{\bar\eta}
\newcommand{\psib}{\bar\psi}
\newcommand{\xib}{\bar\xi}
\newcommand{\Psib}{\bar\Psi}
\newcommand{\psit}{\tilde\psi}
\newcommand{\Psit}{\tilde\Psi}
\renewcommand{\cB}{{\mathcal B}}
\renewcommand{\Im}{{\mathrm {Im}}}
\renewcommand{\Re}{{\mathrm {Re}}}
%\newcommand{0.33}{33}
%\newcommand{0.34}{34}
\nc{\meV}{{\mathrm{\,meV}}}
\nc{\cG}{{\mathcal G}}
\newcommand{\nablaslash}{\nabla\hspace{-.65em}/\hspace{.3em}}
\renewcommand{\bar}{\overline}
\def\ev{{\on{ev}}}
\def\eV{{\mathrm{eV}}}
\nc{\al}{{\alpha}}
\def\zb{{\bar z}}
\def\xx{{\hat x}}
\def\pp{{\hat p}}
\def\db{{\bar \d}}
\def\nm{{\,{\rm nm}}}
\def\cm{{\,{\rm cm}}}
\def\xb{{\bar x}}
\def\pib{{\bar\pi}}
\def\psib{{\bar \psi}}
\def\Ab{{\bar A}}
\def\Arg{{\mathrm{Arg}\,}}
\def\ib{{\bar i}}
\def\jb{{\bar j}}
\def\str{{\rm str}}
\def\eps{{\epsilon}}
%\setlength{\textwidth}{4in}
%\setlength{\textheight}{24cm}
\oddsidemargin=0cm
\evensidemargin=0cm
\topmargin=-2cm
\def\cO{{\cal O}}
\def\CO{{\mathcal O}}
\def\rd{{\rm d}}
\def\sign{{\rm \, sign }}
\def\vphi{\varphi}
\newcommand*\Laplace{\mathop{}\!\mathbin\bigtriangleup}
\renewcommand\red[1]{{\color{blue} #1}}
\renewcommand\gray[1]{{\color{gray} #1}}
%\setlength{\textwidth}{4in}
%\setlength{\textheight}{24cm}
\oddsidemargin=-0.5cm
\evensidemargin=-0.5cm
\topmargin=-2cm
\renewcommand{\)}{\right)}
\renewcommand{\(}{\left(}
\newcommand{\parr}{{\parallel}}
\begin{document}
\title{Suppressed compressibility of quantum Hall effect edge states in epitaxial graphene on SiC}
\author{Sergey Slizovskiy}
\email{on leave of absence from NRC ``Kurchatov Institute'' PNPI, Russia.}
\author{Vladimir I. Fal'ko}
\affiliation{National Graphene Institute, The University of Manchester, M13 9PL, Booth st. E., Manchester, UK }
%\affiliation{NRC ``Kurchatov Institute'' PNPI, Russia}
\keywords{graphene, Quantum Hall Effect, edge states, Quantum Resistance Standard, metrology }
\pacs{}
\begin{abstract}
We determine conditions for the formation of compressible stripes near the quantum Hall effect (QHE) edges of top-gated epitaxial graphene on Si-terminated SiC (G/SiC)
and compare those to graphene exfoliated onto insulating substrate in the field-effect-transistor (GraFET) geometry.
For G/SiC, a large density of localised surface states on SiC just underneath graphene layer and charge transfer between them lead both to doping of graphene and to screening of potential profile near its edge.
This suppresses formation of compressible stripes near QHE edges in graphene, making them much narrower than the corresponding compressible stripes in GraFETs.
%, and present only at much larger distances between graphene and the top gate.
%We also show that extra counter-propagating pairs of edge channels may appear in G/SiC.
%leading to different edge profile in G/SiC.
%\red{ Based on the self-consistent mean-field analysis of electrostatics and electronic spectrum
%near the edge of top-gated graphene in magnetic field, we find a wide compressible stripe in FET geomentry, while in G/SiC compressible stripes can appear
%only for large distance to the top gate and are much narrower. We find that for sufficient distance to the top gate $d$, extra pairs of counter-propagating edge states
%start to appear in both cases, these are normally reconstructed into a compressible stripe by Coulomb interactions for FET geometry, while these remain unreconstructed for G/SiC. }
% (???? counter-propagating pairs of edge channels ??? )
%For the same bulk filling factor $\nu=2$, we find that the self-consistent electrostatic potential bends in different directions in G/SiC vs transferred graphene.
%We find that extra counter-propagating pairs of edge channels start to appear with growing distance to the gate, but their location is reversed between the two cases.
%In transferred graphene, the innermost edge channel undergoes a reconstruction into a compressible stripe of width significantly exceeding the distance to the gate;
%at the same time, the compressible stripes in G/SiC are much narrower and harder to achieve.
%Our results are supported
%We study the effects of inhomogeneous gate potential on the structure of edge states
%. formation of extra counter-propagating edge channels and compressible strips in graphene.
%in a geometry of top-gate -- insulator -- graphene -- insulator for the two substatially different cases
%of (A) top-gated epitaxial graphene on Si-terminated SiC, where a strong charge-tranfer between graphene and surface states of SiC exists and (B)
%gated graphene on insulating substrate without any surface states.
%It is known that long-range Coulomb interactions may lead to reconstruction of Quantum Hall edge states into compressible strips.
%We find that in SiC epitaxial graphene the edge states are confined close to the edge and are resilient to formation of compressible strips, with
%very shallow gate potential required for them to form. Long-range Coulomb interactions are screened by surface states and play no role in formation of edge states.
%On the contrary, for type B, the innermost edge channel is reconstructed into a wide compressible strip, driven by long-range Coulomb interactions.
%The calculations of self-consistent potential and electronic spectrum allow us to discuss the properties of edge states and the conditions for appearance of extra pairs of
%counter-propagating edge states.
%, inherited from
%the (zigzag-type) evanescent modes in graphene at zero magnetic field.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\section{Introduction}
Edge states in the quantum Hall effect (QHE) systems \cite{vonKlitzing80,Laughlin81,EdgeThouless2,EdgeThouless1, ButtikerChiral,vonKlitzing86}
are chiral, providing transport channels that carry electrons along the edge in the direction set by magnetic field polarity.
Over the years, investigations of
the structure of edge states in semiconductor heterostructures were carried out for the understanding of current noise\cite{EdgeEquilibration, MartinFeng90, GerhardsCurrents, PartialEquilibration09, Kovrizhin}
and cooling rates\cite{2DEGHeat,GrapheneExperiment, SSFalko} in the QHE regime.
%Edge states have been studied for 2D electron gas (2DEG) in semiconductor heterostructures \cite{Gerhards88,Shklovskii92, Chalker93,Fogler94,GerhardsCurrents}, where
For electrons in GaAs/AlGaAs devices, it has been shown\cite{Gerhards88,Shklovskii92, Chalker93,Fogler94,GerhardsCurrents} that,
in a strong magnetic field, an electrostatically soft edge
%in the slowly-varying electrostatic potential created by a remote gate edge states
of a 2D electron gas
reconstructs into a
sequence of compressible and incompressible stripes.
A similar possibility was recently suggested for graphene \cite{Efetov, EdgeSiO2, IvanEdgePotential, StripeHubbard,CompressibleInAStripe}, where an essential difference
arises from
%the actual termination of the 2D crystal, leading to
a $|y|^{-1/2}$ singularity in the charge density near the edge\footnote{
In contrast to 2DEG created by smooth gate potentials, graphene has a finite density of states up to the very edge of the flake. This leads to
a sigularity in the charge density near the edge, known to appear in thin charged metal plates \cite{TextBook}}
graphene-specific
%new type of ``non-gaussian''
edge states\cite{EdgeStates1, EdgeStates2, Abanin2007, EdgeStates3, AbaninEdgeWithScreening}.
%, additionally to .
%Charge accumulation near the edge may
%lead to the formation of additional pairs of counter-propagating edge channels\cite{Efetov, EdgeSiO2, IvanEdgePotential, StripeHubbard,CompressibleInAStripe}.
%To some extent, formation of compressible/incompressible stripes is determined by the electrostatics of graphene doping, which may affect properties of edges in various graphene-based QHE systems.
%, affecting compressible stripes.
%The properties of these edge states depend on the details
%of graphene boundary.
%At the same time, the edge states formed near the physical graphene edge are not reconstructed into the compressible stripes \cite{AbaninEdgeWithScreening}.
%To summarise, there are two types of edge channels that can appear in graphene: those localized at the sharp edge of graphene flake and
%those induced by variations of electrostatic potential and located slightly away from the edge.
When epitaxial graphene is grown on Si-terminated face of SiC (G/SiC), a ``dead layer'' of carbons forms on the SiC surface, right underneath graphene\cite{EpitaxialGrowth, ReviewBOSTWICK}.
This dead layer carries a large
density of localised states, and
charge
transfer \cite{ChargeTransfer10,Sasha1,Sasha2,Rozhko,Sasha3, FalkoPinning} between graphene and these surface states dopes graphene. At a strong magnetic field, such charge transfer pins graphene doping at integer filling
factors\cite{FalkoPinning,Sasha3}, leading to the anomalously wide
QHE plateux,
in particular, at filling factors $\nu = \pm 2 $.
This makes G/SiC a promising material platform for the realisation of metrological resistance
standard based on the QHE phenomenon\cite{Sasha1,Sasha2,Rozhko,Sasha3,FalkoPinning,TransferredGrapheneQHE,
CWDGrapheneQHE,LongPlateau16,CWDTransferred, QHEEpitaxialLowField}.
For practical applications of G/SiC in resistance metrology, which requires achieving robust QHE plateux at moderate magnetic fields,
%As charge transfer in G/SiC leads to a significant electron doping of graphene,
top gating is used to reduce graphene
doping. This should be contrasted to graphene exfoliated onto an insulating substrate in a field-effect transistor (GraFET), where gates are used to dope otherwise neutral graphene.
%with charge carriers.
Below, we show that these features of G/SiC, as well as an efficient electrostatic screening produced by charge transfer between graphene and surface states on SiC
%and these features of G/SiC change the conditions
suppress the formation of compressible stripes near graphene edge.
%in graphene, that is related to the charge transfer,
%rather than to long-range Coulomb interactions.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
%\rotatebox{90}{
%\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
% \hline
% \shortstack{Substrate \\ SiC} & \shortstack{Spacer \\ PMMA} & \shortstack{ Work function \\ difference} & \shortstack{Top-gate\\distance} \\
% $\eps_1 = 9.7$ & $ \eps_2 = 3.5 $& $A = 0.2\, \eV $ & $d = 20 \div 400 \nm$ \\
% \hline
% \end{tabular}
% }
% drawn in EdgeWithPotential8.nb
\includegraphics[scale=0.77]{GatingIllustration5.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
%\begin{table*}
% \begin{center}
% \caption{\label{tab:params}
% Parameters of the device, studied as an example}
%\end{center}
%\end{table*}
\caption{\label{fig:GatingIllustration}
Edge of gated epitaxial graphene on SiC (G/SiC). Electric field lines are plotted with color indicating the field strength.
The parameters used in numerical analysis are: $\eps_1 = 9.7$, $ \eps_2 = 3.5 $, $d = 20 \div 400 \nm$.
}
\vspace{-0.5 cm}
\end{figure}
%In this work
%we study the effect of charge transfer in G/SiC on the structure of edge states.
%To analyse the formation of compressible stripes near the edge of a QHE device,
Here, we consider G/SiC with a top gate located at a distance $d$ above graphene and extended beyond
the edge of graphene flake, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:GatingIllustration}. We assume that,
far away from the edge ($y \to \infty$), graphene is tuned to the most robust $\nu = \pm 2 $ QHE plateau states.
In Section \ref{sec:electrostatics}, we model the electrostatic environment of such gated G/SiC devices.
This gives an input for analysing the self-consistent potential near the edge and for finding the electronic spectrum in quantizing magnetic fields. In Section \ref{sec:EpitaxialSpectrum},
we show that, when a significant potential inhomogeneity builds up, extra pairs of counter-propagating edge channels start to appear at the edge, whereas the inner edge state may give rise to a narrow compressible stripe.
%magnetoband structure of epitaxial graphene and discuss
%the validity where
%of possible approximations
In Section \ref{sec:StripsStandard}, we compare the edge states in G/SiC with edge states in GraFETs, concluding that in G/SiC formation of compressible stripes is strongly suppressed by
the features of charge transfer in this system.
%are studied \red{for
%G/SiO$_2$/Si
%graphene in an FET devices, allowing us to compare epitaxial G/SiC with transferred graphene.}
%Note that for numerical modelling we choose device parameters that provide $\nu = \pm 2$ QHE plateaux for $B \sim 5$ Tesla, which is the magnetic field range used for the implementation
%of graphene in the practical quantum resistance standard \cite{Rozhko} by National Physical Laboratory and Oxford instruments.
%in the same environment and pinpoint the main differences, summarized in Sec. \ref{sec:Conclusions}.
%\begin{enumerate}[label={ (\alph*)}]
% \item Pairs of counter-propagating edge channels can appear in both cases, when $d$ exceeds several magnetic lengths. The velocity of the channels closest to the edge is typically
%higher.
% \item
%while the doping in gated graphene on SiO$_2$ substrate is typically enhanced near the edges, whereas the doping of epitaxial graphene is suppressed near the edges and may change the
% sign, forming extra pair of counter-propagating edge channels.
% \item
%Long-range static Coulomb interactions of electrons are screened in epitaxial graphene by the redistribution of charges in the surface states of SiC.
%while these are present
%for the standard graphene.
% \item
%For the standard graphene, the innermost edge channel is normally reconstructed into a wide compressible strip, with long-range Coulomb interactions being
% a driving mechanism. For epitaxial graphene, compressible strips can appear only in a shallow external potential (where $l_{strip}$ in \eq{StripeWidth} exceeds two magnetic lengths).
%The mechanism of compressible strip formation is related to large compressibility of surface states in SiC, and not to long-range Coulomb interactions.
%can a narrow compressible strip be formed.
% \item
%Also we analyse ...
%As a result, the beginning of $\nu=2$ incompressible state is closer to the edge in
% the epitaxial graphene, Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes}, as compared to graphene transferred to SiO$_2$, Fig. \ref{fig:StripeSiO2}
% (which agrees with the experimental result of Ref. \onlinecite{EdgeSiO2}).
%\end{enumerate}
%The paper is organized as follows.
%In Sec. \ref{sec:BandStructure} we analyse electron dispersion and drift velocities complete in edge channels and discuss the infuence of G/SiC specific
%edge states on the use of this matherial for QHE devices.
%(we do not dwell up on how the short-range part of Coulomb interactions affects the compressible strip, see e.g. Ref.\onlinecite{Goerbig}) .
%Discussion and conclusions are presented in Sec.\ref{sec:Conclusions}.
%, where electron
%density on graphene is fixed.
%The surface states in SiC can be viewed as providing a large amount of localized states needed to get wide QHE plateaus \cite{ChargeTransfer10,Sasha1,Sasha2,Rozhko,Sasha3} and
%to substantially cure the potential fluctuations due to external disorder \cite{DisorderEpitaxial15}.
%The inhomogeneous potential may create a pattern of compressible and incompressible regions (strips) near the edge. These have been discussed in the literature \cite{Efetov, EdgeSiO2}
%for the typical cases of graphene on insulating substrate, as well a for 2D electron gas (2DEG) in semiconducting heterostructures \cite{Gerhards88,Shklovskii92, Chalker93,Fogler94,GerhardsCurrents}, where
%it was shown that for a generic smooth gate potential one expects a formation of wide compressible strips separated by narrow incompressible strips. This requires precise tuning of gate potential
%in order to observe QHE resistance quantization. This should be contracted with SiC epitaxial graphene, where the phenonenon of charge transfer between graphene and surface state of substrate leads
%to strong pinning of QHE plateus \cite{ChargeTransfer10,Sasha1,Sasha2,Rozhko,Sasha3}. Gating is required for SiC samples in order to moderate the excessive spontaneous electron dopping of graphene
%caused by charge transfer from SiC to graphene. Such gating does also induce inhomogeneous potential near graphene edge, but the behaviour of resulting compressible/incompressible strips and edge states is
%drastically differenent. In this work we discuss the effects of gating potential inhomogeneity near the edge, comparing our findings with the (standard) case of graphene not being subject to strong charge transfer.
%In this work we consider the effects of inhomogeneities of gating potential near the edge of realistic SiC epitaxial graphene Hall bar \cite{..}. We find that for a broad range
%of parameters, the external potential creates a pair of additional counter-propagating edge states at distances of several magnetic length from the edge. These edge states
%do not influence the measured voltage away from the hot spots since, due to noticeable overlap of wave-functions,
%they equilibrate and get localized at short length scales. On the other hand, these edge states greatly improve the efficiency of edge cooling, since the velocity of all the edge states is reduced.
\section{Edge potential profile for gated G/SiC} \label{sec:electrostatics}
%In this work we explore the conditions when extra edge states appear near the edges.
%We show that QHE edge channels of epitaxial graphene on SiC present a novel physical system that has not been discussed before.
%In this section we formulate an electrostatic problem arising near the edge of top-gated G/SiC.
In this section we analyse the electrostatics of graphene's edge in typical devices used in graphene QHE metrology \cite{Sasha1,Sasha2,Rozhko,Sasha3}, Fig. \ref{fig:GatingIllustration}, where epitaxial G/SiC is coated with PMMA
and top-gated using a metallic electrode.
It has been noticed \cite{EpitaxialGrowth, ReviewBOSTWICK, ChemicalGating} that, due to the work function difference between graphene and SiC surface states,
epitaxial graphene grown on Si-terminated face of SiC (G/SiC) is significantly electron-doped by the charge transfer\cite{ChargeTransfer10,Sasha1,Sasha2,Rozhko,Sasha3, FalkoPinning} from the dead layer of carbons on SiC surface.
Based on parameters quoted in Refs.[\onlinecite{Sasha3}] and [\onlinecite{LongPlateau16}], we use $\gamma \approx 2 \nm^{-2} \eV^{-1}$ for the density of localized surface states on SiC,
%An important feature of G/SiC is a large density,
which appear in the immediate vicinity, $d_1 \approx 0.3 \nm \ll d$, of graphene.
To reduce the electron doping of graphene and achieve QHE filling factor $\nu =\pm 2$ for magnetic fields range, $B \sim 5 - 15 $ Tesla, one employs electrostatic gating.
%Hence, here we consider a device,
%The top gate may be realised either as a metal, or as a layer of negatively charged ions deposited via corona-discharge, or via UV irradiation of chemically
%active ZEP polymer \cite{ChemicalGating, Sasha1}. Below, we assume the top gate to be metallic and demand the electrostatic potential on it to be a constant (fixed to be zero).
%Charge transfer between the surface states and graphene
%This produces an efficient charge transfer between graphene and surface states \cite{ChargeTransfer10}, explaining the exceptionally wide
%QHE plateaus observed in G/SiC\cite{Sasha1,Sasha2,Rozhko,Sasha3,LongPlateau16}.
%and
%heals any significant potential inhomogeneities (disorder) on graphene \cite{DisorderEpitaxial15}. The doping of graphene is typically controlled by a top gate,
%which may be realised either as a metallic gate, or as a layer of negatively charged ions deposited via corona-discharge, or via UV irradiation of chemically active ZEP polymer \cite{}.
%As a result, we need to consider a charge transfer model where one part of the charge resides in the surface layers of SiC and PMMA at distances much lower than the magnetic length $l_B =\sqrt{ \frac{\hbar}{e B}}$,
%while the other, tunable,
%part of the charge is deposited on top of PMMA coating, which have a typical thickness in the range 50 -- 300 nm, exceeding the magnetic length.
%The fact that the density of surface states exceeds the typical density of states in graphene by an order of magnitude leads to an efficient screening of electrostatic potentials
%originating from inhomogeneous electron density in graphene, thus the details of edge states or compressible strips are expected to differ fundamentally
%from the previously studied cases \cite{Gerhards88,Shklovskii92, Chalker93,Fogler94,GerhardsCurrents}.
%We shall use the following self-consistent procedure to determine the location and velocities of edge states in graphene in QHE regime:
%\begin{enumerate}
% \item Solve an electrostatic problem for an infinite metallic top gate and half-plane graphene surrounded with surface states, having a large constant
%density of state, determined by the density of surface states.
% \item Find the electrostatic potential on graphene, assuming that it is in an incompressible QHE state with desired filling factor
% \item Find the electronic bands in magnetic field in graphene close to the edge, find the resulting density of states
% \item Iterate 2), 3) until convergence.
%\end{enumerate}
%\subsection{Numerical method for solution of electrostatic problem} \label{sec:NumericalFitMethod}
%\subsection{Metallic half-plane }
%Consider an electrostatic problem for the surface states of SiC and graphene.
%, and a large density of states, $\gamma$.
%Parameters used to describe such screening on a half-plane $y>0 \, (z=0)$ are the (large) density of states (DoS)
% $\gamma$ of SiC surface states and the total charge density $\rho(y)$.
Due to the presence of donors just underneath graphene, the compressibility of electrons in this system
never falls below the value determined by $\gamma$, even in places where the Fermi level, $\mu$, falls between Landau levels in graphene.
%the result for the total charge density barely depends on the density of states or its variations
Therefore, for so large $\gamma$ that
$$ \frac{\gamma e^2 d}{2 \pi \eps_0 (\eps_1+\eps_2)} \equiv \tilde \gamma \gg 1,
$$
{the quantum
capacitance of graphene together with a surface dead layer is much larger than the
geometric capacitance, resulting in a metallic behaviour of this system}.
For G/SiC, $\tilde\gamma$ falls in the range $10<\tilde \gamma <200$ for the device parameters listed in Fig. \ref{fig:GatingIllustration}, allowing
us to consider graphene electrons and SiC surface donors, with a total charge density,
\beq \label{TotalCharge}
\rho(y)=-e n_G(y) + e n_{D^+},
\eeq
as an almost perfectly screening charge system on the half-plane, $y>0$, $z=0$.
%, when
%we are looking at distance scales $>d_1$ and consider the total
%charge density,
%and electrostatic potential $\varphi(y)$.
%This allows us to consider
%to the large DoS of donor surface states in SiC, $\gamma$.
%, since graphene is incompressible almost
%everywhere and even when it is compressible, its DoS is smaller than $\gamma$.
%Assuming the edge along the $x$ direction,
%The potentials above/below graphene
%are defined as $\varphi_2(y,z)$ for $z\ge 0$ and $\varphi_1(y,z)$ for $z \le 0$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:GatingIllustration}.
Imposing the condition $\varphi(y,d) = 0$ at the metallic top gate, one finds\cite{Efetov}
\beqa \label{phi12}
\varphi(y,z<0) &=& \frac{1}{ 2 \pi \eps_0} \int\limits_0^\infty \left[ - \frac{2 \rho(y')}{\eps_1 + \eps_2} \ln |{\bf R}| \right. \hspace{2cm} \\
&&+\left.\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{4 \eps_2 \rho(y') \xi^n}{\eps_1^2-\eps_2^2} \ln |{\bf R} -
2 n {\bf d}| \right] dy' , \nn \\
\varphi(y,z>0) &=& \int\limits_0^\infty \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{2 \rho(y') \xi^n}{2 \pi \eps_0 (\eps_1+\eps_2)} \ln\frac{|{\bf R} - 2 (n+1) {\bf d}|} {|{\bf R} +2 n {\bf d} |} dy'. \nn
\eeqa
Here ${\bf R} = \left ( 0, y-y',z \right) $, ${\bf d} = (0,0 ,d)$ and $\xi = \frac{\eps_1 - \eps_2}{\eps_1+ \eps_2}$.
%The charge density for the plate, $\rho(x)$, and electrostatic potential $\varphi$,
%are related as \cite{Efetov}:
Also,
%, leading to the potential at $z=0$ expressed as
\beqa \label{KernelK}
\varphi(y,0) &=& \int_0^\infty K(y,y') \rho(y') dy' \equiv \varphi(y) , \\
\nn \ K(y,y') &=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{\xi^n}{2 \pi \eps_0 (\eps_1+\eps_2)} \ln\frac{(y'-y)^2 +
4 (n+1)^2 d^2}{
(y'-y)^2 + (2 n d)^2}.
\eeqa
%where $\xi = \frac{\eps_1 - \eps_2}{\eps_1+ \eps_2} \approx 0.47$.
The electric field $\mathcal{E}_z$ just above graphene ($z=0+$) is
\beqa
\mathcal{E}_z(y)& \equiv & - \d_z \varphi(y,z)|_{z=0+} = \int_0^\infty K_\mathcal{E}(y,y') \rho(y') dy',
\nn \\ \nn K_{\mathcal{E}}(y,y') &=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{ \xi^n\, d^2}{2 \pi \eps_0 (\eps_1+\eps_2)}
\left[ \frac{4 n}{4 (n d)^2+\left(y-y'\right)^2}\right. \\
&&\hspace{0.8cm}+\left. \nn \frac{4 (n+1)}{4 (n+1)^2 d^2 +\left(y-y'\right)^2} \right].
\eeqa
The condition for electrochemical equilibrium for the composite system of graphene and donors is,
\beq \label{PhiChemical}
\varphi(y) + \frac{\rho(y) - \rho(\infty)}{e^2 \gamma} = - V_g,
\eeq
and this leads to an inverse problem to find the charge density for a given voltage $V_g$. % , here $V_g$ is top gate voltage relative to graphene away from its boundary and $y>0$.
%In the limit of $\gamma \to \infty$, this equation determines a constant potential everywhere on the half-plane $y>0$, while the finite DoS becomes important
%only at small distances $y/d\lesssim\tilde \gamma^{-2}$ from the edge.
%This equation should, in general, be corrected by the value of Hall voltage
%near the particular edge, and by the voltage difference between SiC surface and graphene, but such corrections are small since, typically, $V_g \sim -20$V, while $V_{Hall} \sim 2 $V
%for the currents close to QHE breakdown threshold, and can, for the purpose of the present discussion, be absorbed in the value of $V_g$.
%and $E_G(x)$ is the Fermi energy in graphene, relative to its Dirac point;
%The effect of a finite density of states $\gamma$ is incorporated via a dimensionless parameter
%$$ \tilde \gamma = \frac{\gamma e^2 d}{2 \pi \eps_0 (\eps_1+\eps_2)},$$
Analytical solutions of Eqs. (\ref{KernelK}) and (\ref{PhiChemical}) are known for $\gamma \to \infty$ in several asymptotic limits:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\alph*), wide, labelwidth=!, labelindent=0pt]
\item For $\eps_1 \to \infty$, the substrate acts as a metal along the whole plane and the exact solution
is $\rho = const$, corresponding to infinite plane capacitor.
\item For finite $\eps_{1,2}$, the solution to \Eqs{KernelK}{PhiChemical} has a singular behavior\cite{TextBook, KhaetskiiFalko, Efetov} near the edge of
graphene,
$$
\rho(y) \sim \mathcal{E}_z(y) \sim y^{-1/2}, \text{ for } \tilde\gamma^{-2} < \frac{y}{d} < 1,
$$
while a finite density of states regularizes the divergence at $y < d/\tilde\gamma^2 $, and the presence of a metallic top-gate is responsible for a stronger decay at $y \gg d$.
%This also illustrates the general result that perturbations to the constant electric field between the two metallic plates decay exponentially with $y/d$.
\item When $\eps_1 = \eps_2=\eps$ ($\xi = 0$ in \Eq{phi12}),
%we need only one mirror image of graphene above the gate and
the
problem is reduced to finding the charge distribution near the ends of a plane capacitor \cite{TextBook,Lavrentiev}.
%The inverse of the solution $\varphi(y,z)$ is obtained by
A holomorphic mapping of
infinite strip, $(-V_g \leq \varphi \leq V_g, u)$, to the complex $y-z$ plane with two cuts, $(y>0, \,z=0)$ and $(y>0, \, z=2 d)$, produces a solution for potential $\varphi$,
\beq \nn
y + i (d-z) = - \frac{d}{\pi} \left[ e^{\frac{\pi}{V_g} (i \varphi + u)} + \frac{\pi}{V} (i \varphi + u) + 1 \right].
\eeq
Exactly on graphene
%where the auxiliary variable $u\in (-\infty, \infty)$ is a parameter along the equipotential lines. Along graphene
($z=0$, $\varphi = -V_g$), the auxiliary variable $u$ is related to $y$ via
$$\frac{\pi y}{d} = e^{\frac{\pi u}{V_g}}-\frac{\pi u}{V_g} -1 $$
with $u< 0$ ($u>0$) corresponding to points just above (below) graphene (i.e. $z=\pm 0$).
%For $|y/d| \gg 1$ we have $y/d \approx -u/V_g + 1/\pi$ above graphene and $y/d \approx \frac{1}{\pi}e^{\frac{\pi u}{V_g}}$
%below graphene.
Electric field near graphene is $\mathcal{E}_z = \frac{V_g}{d} \frac{1}{1 - e^{\frac{\pi u}{V_g}}}$ and the charge density at $z=0$ is given by
$$\rho(y) =\frac{\mathcal{E}_z(y,+0) - \mathcal{E}_z(y,-0)}{\eps\eps_0} \underset{y \gg d}{\approx} \frac{V_g}{\eps_0 \eps d} \left( 1 + \frac{d}{\pi y} \right ). $$
%showing the slowly-decaying $d/y$ behavior.
\item For $\eps_1 \ll \eps_2$, one can find \cite{KhaetskiiFalko} for the electrostatic problem:
\beq \nn
\rho(y) = \frac{ - \eps_0 \eps_1 V_g }{d \sqrt{1-e^{-\frac{\pi y}{d}}}}.
\eeq
\end{enumerate}
Aiming at modelling the devices used in the experiments reported in Refs.[\onlinecite{Sasha2, Sasha3, Rozhko}], we
solve \Eqs{KernelK}{PhiChemical} numerically for $\tilde\gamma \gg 1$. Then, knowing the form of all of the above-listed asymptotics, we find the interpolation formula,
\beqa
\rho(y) &=& \frac{-3.5 V_g \eps_0}{d} \left( \frac{1}{\frac{1}{2 \tilde \gamma} + \sqrt{1-e^{-\frac{\pi y}{2 d} } }} + \frac{0.5}{\frac{1}{ \tilde \gamma} + \sqrt{\frac{y}{d}}} \right), \nn\\
\mathcal{E}_z(y) &=& \frac{-V_g}{d} \left(1+ \frac{0.22 e^{-\frac{2.5 y}{d}}}{\frac{1}{ \tilde \gamma}+\sqrt{\frac{y}{d}}} \right),
\label{rhoEq}
\eeqa
which work with 1\% accuracy for the obtained numerical solution.
%The screening of dead layers
%as compared to the numerical solution.
%where the effect of the finite density of states $\gamma$ is incorporated via the dimensionless combination
%$\tilde \gamma = \frac{\gamma e^2 d}{2 \pi \eps_0 (\eps_1+\eps_2)}$ (for $d=100 \nm$ and $\gamma = 2 \nm^{-2} \eV^{-1} $ we have $\tilde \gamma \approx 40 $) and is important
%only at very small distances $y/d\lesssim\tilde \gamma^{-2}$ from the edge.
%Note that the electric field above graphene decays exponentially away from the edge,
%as expected for the field between the two metallic plates,
%but the charge density
%has a weakly decaying part, due to the field lines that pass below graphene via SiC, see Fig. \ref{fig:GatingIllustration}.
%We see that the effect of the top gate becomes stronger near the edges of graphene.
%, hence, we anticipate that the filling factor may drop from $+2$ (electron doping) in the bulk of the sample
%to $-2$ (hole doping) near the edge with
%extra edge states formed in between.
%For the same reasons, any spikes in the total density of states originating from QHE phenomena in graphene will
%not change the total
\section{Compressibility of QHE edge states in G/SiC} \label{sec:EpitaxialSpectrum}
%To describe interacting electrons in graphene in the mean-field approximation, one needs to find the electrostatic potential, $U(y)$, induced in graphene by the remote metallic
%gate, surface states
%that effectively act as another gate, located in close proximity of graphene,
%and by graphene electron themselves.
%(for definiteness, we fix $U(y\to \infty) = 0$).
%To solve the problem, we first express
Having found the total charge density of graphene electrons and SiC surface donors, we find how the total charge, $\rho$, is divided between graphene, $-e n_G$, and SiC donor states, $e n_D$.
We relate the electrostatic potential for surface states in SiC, $U_{SiC}$, to electrostatic potential {energy $U$ of electrons} in graphene
%in devices sketched in Fig. \ref{fig:GatingIllustration} can be described
as:
\beq \label{EqUSiC}
U_{SiC}(y) = U(y) - e d_1 \left[\eps_2 \mathcal{E}_z(y) + \frac{e n_G(y)}{\eps_0}\right].
\eeq
%where $d_1 \approx 0.3 \nm$ is a vertical distance between the surface states and graphene,
Here
%$\mathcal{E}_z(y) \eps_2 + e n_G(y)/\eps_0 $
%is the vertical electric field between graphene and SiC ($\mathcal{E}_z$ is found in \eq{rhoEq}), and
$n_G(y)$ is the local
%expectation value of
electron density in graphene at point $y$ and
%Assuming that the localized surface states in SiC have density $\gamma$ and the work function of neutral SiC is lower by $A$ than the one of neutral graphene
%\footnote{The value of $A$ is sample-dependent, and, for definiteness, we consider $A=0.2 \,\eV$ since this value
%leads to electron doping levels measured in the recent graphene samples $n_G\sim 10^{12} \cm^{-2}$ if no top gate voltage is applied \cite{Sasha3} (Note that samples discussed
%in older literature had higher electron doping levels, corresponding to $A \sim 0.5\, \eV $ \cite{Sasha1}).},
the density of donors on SiC surface is \cite{ChargeTransfer10,Sasha1, FalkoPinning}:
%xpress the Fermi energy of SiC surface states as:
\beq \label{Eqmu}
n_{D^+} = \gamma \left[ A + U_{SiC}(y) - \mu\right],
\eeq
where $A \approx 0.2 \,\eV$ is a work function difference between charge-neutral SiC surface and undoped graphene.
Electrochemical equilibrium conditions require that electrons in localized surface states on SiC have the
same electrochemical potential, $\mu$, as graphene, which we count from the Dirac point in graphene far away from the edge,
%(below we shall consider examples of $\mu = \pm \frac12 \sqrt{2} \hbar v/l_B $, corresponding
%to filling factors $\nu = \pm 2$ in the bulk).
%Using the total charge density, $\rho(y)$ in \eq{rhoEq}, \eq{TotalCharge}
%leads to
so that
\beq \label{ChargeTransfer2plate}
\ba{c} \frac{n_G(y)}{\gamma_{\rm eff}} =
A - \mu + U(y) - e \eps_2 \mathcal{E}_z(y) d_1 - \frac{\rho(y)}{e \gamma},\\
\frac{1}{\gamma_{\rm eff}} \equiv \frac{1}{\gamma} + \frac{d_1 e^2}{\eps_0}.
\ea
\eeq
%relating the local electron density and the electrostatic potential in graphene with the charge density, $\rho(y)$, and electric field, $\mathcal{E}_z(y)$, induced by a remote metallic gate and
%given in \Eqs{rhoEq}{Eeq}.
%To solve this equation, we need the relation of $U(y)$ and $n_G(y)$ that is an intrinsic property of graphene in external magnetic field.
%To solve this equation, we need electronic spectrum of graphene
In general, the relation between $U(y)$ and $n_G(y)$ is non-local
[see \eq{nGEquation} below]. However, in the case that potential $U(y)$ varies slowly
at the length scale of magnetic length, $l_B = \sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{eB}}$, ($\nabla U \ll \frac{\hbar v}{l_B^2} $), one may
approximate the local energy of Landau levels (LL) in graphene as
%$$ E_n + U(y) =
%use quasi-classical approximation, based on the energy levels in the constant potential.
%assume where one assumes $U(y)$ to be locally a constant.
%The local Landau level (LL) spectrum of monolayer graphene in external potential $U$ is given by
\beq
E_n + U(y) = \frac{\hbar v}{l_B} \sign(n) \sqrt{2 |n|} + U(y).
\eeq
%Taking into account spin and valley degeneracy,
The local density of electrons can be related to the local filling factor, $\nu_n(y)$,
determined by the number of filled LLs and spin/valley degeneracy,
%\beq \label{FillingClassical1}
% n_G(y) \approx \frac{e B}{h} \nu(y).
% \eeq
%with degeneracy density $4 \frac{e B}{h}$, where we take into account spin and valley degeneracy
%\red{(the influence of interaction-induced spin/valley ferromagnetism will be illustrated in the final result)}.
%This determines
%Assuming a small Gaussian broadening\cite{DisorderEpitaxial15}, $\Delta$, of LLs due to microscopic charge inhomogeneity in SiC,
%we define the ``local Fermi-level'', $E_G(y)$ and
%the local filling factor, $\nu_n(y)$, of $n$-th Landau level (LL) as
\beqa
% \label{FillingClassical}
%E_G(y) &\equiv& \mu - U(y),\\
\label{FillingClassical1}
n_G(y) \approx \frac{e B}{h} \nu(y).
% ,\\
% \nu(y)& =& \lim_{N\to \infty} \sum_{n=-N}^N \nu_n(y), \nn \\
% \nu_n(y)& \equiv& 2\, {\rm Erf}\frac{\mu - U(y) - E_n}{\Delta} ,
%\label{nuQuasiclassical}
\eeqa
%where a small gaussian LL broadening $\Delta$ is assumed.
Solving \eq{ChargeTransfer2plate} with $n_G$ given above leads to results shown by dotted lines in Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes}.
The resulting potential on graphene have a number of horizontal intervals, which would correspond to compressible stripes,
if the conditions for validity of quasiclassical approximations
are satisfied.
% The electron density, $n$, is given in the quasi-classical approximation by
%In the quasi-classical approximation, $E_G(y)$ have a meaning of local Fermi-level in graphene.
%We aim to relate the electrostatic potential on graphene, $-E_G(y)$, with electron denstity, $n_G(y)$.
%$\Delta \gtrsim 0.02 \eV$ \cite{Sasha3} is Landau level broadening.
%While is natural to expect that for small disorder $\Delta$ e-e interaction effects become important and spin and valley resolved edge states will form
%\cite{EdgeEquilibration}, we do not expect this to be observed in epitaxial graphene on SiC due to potential disorder.
%\section{Compressible strips in epitaxial graphene}
%At lower levels of disorder or at higher magnetic fields,
%the edge states may degenerate into thin compressible strips,
%when the gating potential is shallow enough. We stress that electron density in graphene is firmly controlled by the charge transfer from SiC that screens those
%long-range Coulomb interactions that led to self-consistent charge redistribution and wide compressible strips in the works \cite{Gerhards88, Shklovskii92, Chalker93, Fogler94, GerhardsCurrents}.
% To describe the possible narrow compressible strips, we need to zoom in into the features at length scales comparable to magnetic length. For that we will have to make a step beyond the
%standard self-consistent quasiclassical analysis \cite{Gerhards88, Shklovskii92, Chalker93, Fogler94, GerhardsCurrents} and account for the Gaussian shape of the electron wave-function in magnetic field.
%At this point, there are three possible levels of approximation that can be made to find the relation of charge density on graphene, $n_G(y)$, with the induced potential, $-E_G(y)$.
%\begin{enumerate}
% \item If the potential variation is slow $l_B \left | \d_y E_G(y) \right | \ll \frac{\hbar v}{l_B}$, we can use $n(y) = \frac{e B}{h} \nu(y) $ where the filling factor
%is
%\beq \label{FillingClassical}
% \nu(y) = \sum_{i=-\infty}^\infty 2\, {\rm Erf}\frac{E_G(y)-E_i}{\Delta} , \ E_i = \frac{\hbar v}{l_B} \sign(i) \sqrt{2 |i|},
%\eeq
%and $\Delta$ is Landau level broadening.
%\nu(x) = 4 \left [ \sign (E_G) \left ( \frac{ l_B E_G(x)}{\hbar v \sqrt{2} } \right)^2\right] + 2$ ( with $[]$ denoting the integer part).
%This approximation is valid at distance scales exceeding $l_B$ and
%making all the equations local.
%In the limit $\Delta \to 0$ this leads to the expectation of narrow regions of constant potential (``compressible stripes'') near the points where $E_G(y)$ crosses the Landau levels,
%shown by dotted lines in Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes}.
%At the same time, Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes} illustrates that these would-be compressible stripes are often thinner than
%magnetic length and so the quasiclassical approximation is not applicable.
%These stripes are compressible due to low energy cost to transfer electron from SiC donors to graphene Landau level when
%there are vacant states at the Fermi level.
%, where the
%gate potential is smoother.
%Assuming a fixed position of strip center, the strip width
%(in units of $l_B=\sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{e B}}$ )
% grows as $B$ with increasing magnetic field, and
%it decreases as $V_g^{-1}$ with increasing gate voltage.
%This seem to indicates a tendency to formation of compressible strips at higher magnetic fields, if $U(y)$ is kept fixed, but
%this is not consistent
%the gate potential is kept fixed, but
%If the gate voltage, $V_g$, is tuned to make $\nu=2$ far from the edge, then the needed $V_g$ decreases with increasing magnetic field,
%shifting the location of compressible strips towards the edge, where the potential is steeper,
%which hampers the formation of compressible strips.}.
%This formula is approximately valid when $l_{strip} > l_B$, otherwise, as we show below, the compressible strip does not form.
When the width of a stripe is comparable to magnetic length, $l_B$, %=\sqrt{\frac{\hbar}{e B}}$,
%the quasi-classical approach becomes invalid and
we must account for a
finite extent of electron's wave functions in a magnetic field, therefore, going beyond the quasi-classical approximation used in \eq{FillingClassical1}.
% Below we show, that when $l_\text{strip}\lesssim 2 l_B $ in \eq{StripeWidth}, the compressible
% stripe is actually not formed (see Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes}).
Here, we use Landau gauge and parameterise states with momentum $p$ along the edge, related to the distance of electronic
wave function from the edge, $y_0 = - l_B^2\, p $.
%This motivates to define the width of compressible stripe as $l_B^{-2}$ times the width of the flat part of the dispersion at the Fermi level.
% how, that when $l_\text{strip}\lesssim 2 l_B $ in \eq{StripeWidth}, the compressible
% stripe is actually not formed (see Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes}).
When $y_0 \gtrsim 2\, l_B$, wave functions of LLs have a Gaussian form:
\beqa
\nn
|\psi_{0,y_0}(y)|^2 &=&\frac{1}{ \sqrt{\pi} l_B} e^{-\delta^2} , \ \ \ \delta \equiv \frac{y-y_0}{l_B};\\
|\psi_{n\neq0,y_0}(y)|^2& =& \frac{ H^2_{|n|}(\delta) + 2 |n| H^2_{|n|-1}(\delta)}{2^{|n|+1} |n|! \sqrt{\pi} l_B} e^{-\delta^2},
\nn
\eeqa
where $H_n(x)$ are Hermite polynomials.
While for a smooth potential $U(y)$,
%the energy is well approximated by potential energy at the center of the ``cyclotron orbit'',
$E_{n,y_0}\approx E_n+U(y_0)$, but, due to potential having cusp-like features near the ends of compressible stripes (see Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes}), we use a more precise expression
for the LL energy and electron density in graphene,
%At low temperature, the $n$-th LL state centered at $y_0$ is filled if $E_{n,y_0}<\mu$, and converting the momentum integration to integration over $y_0$
%leads to
\beqa
E_{n,y_0} &\approx& \int |\psi_{n,y_0}(y) |^2 U(y) dy, \\
\label{nGEquation}
n_G(y) &=&\frac{1}{2 \pi l_B^2} \sum_{n=-N}^N \int |\psi_{n,y_0}(y)|^2 \tilde\nu_n(y_0) dy_0, \nn \\
\tilde\nu_n(y_0) &\equiv& 2\, {\rm Erf}\frac{\int |\psi_{n,y_0}(y)|^2 [\mu - U(y) - E_n] dy }{\Delta}, \nn
\eeqa
where we introduced a small Gaussian LL broadening, $\Delta$, and a LL cut-off, $N$, for the convergence of our numerical procedure.
Note that the result is independent of $N$ when $|\mu - U(y)| <= \frac{\hbar v}{l_B}\sqrt{2 N}$.
%Note that $\tilde \nu_n(y)$ agrees with the quasi-classical filling factor, $\nu_n(y)$, in \eq{nuQuasiclassical}
%if the second derivative of the potential, $E_G''(y)$, can be negelected, and \eq{nGEquation} is independent of the LL cutoff $N$ as long as $|E_G(y)| < E_N $.
%the definition of the filling factor, $\nu(y)$ looking exactly as \eq{FillingClassical}, where $y$ identified with the centre of LL wave function, $y_0 = - l_B^2 p$.
% Summation over filled levels is rewritten as integation over $y_0$ electron density becomes a nonlocal function of the filling factor:
%resulting in the equation
%\beq \label{x0equation}
% n_G(x) = \frac{1}{\pi^{3/2} l_B^3} \int e^{-\frac{(x'-x)^2}{l_B^2}} \sign(x_0-x) ) dx' = \frac{1}{\pi l_B^2} {\rm Erf}\left(\frac{x_0-x}{l_B}\right) , \ E_G(x_0) = 0.
%\eeq
%This equation is valid under the assumption that $E_G(x)$ crosses zero at the self-consistently determined point $x_0$ without forming a compressible strip.
%Our results show that this happens only in the corner of the parameter space where the potential becomes very steep.
%A more general situation is a formation of compressible strip from $x_1$ to $x_2$. Inside this strip $n_G(x)$ is determined directly
%from \eq{ChargeTransfer2plate} with $E_G = 0$, while outside the strip the zeroth LL is either completely filled ($\nu(x>x_2)=2$) or empty ($\nu(x<x_1)=-2$).
%We also include a finite Gaussian level broadening $\Delta$, which smoothens the sharp non-linearities of the equations
%to be solved together with \eq{ChargeTransfer2plate}.
Together with \eq{ChargeTransfer2plate}, \eq{nGEquation} results in a non-linear integral equation for $U(y)$,
\begin{widetext}
\beq \label{StripsSiC}
\mu - U(y) = - \frac{1}{\gamma_{\rm eff}} \frac{1}{\pi l_B^2} \int dy_0 \left[ \sum_{n=-N}^N |\psi_{n, y_0}(y)|^2
{\rm Erf}\frac{\int |\psi_{n,y_0}(y)|^2 (\mu -U(y)-E_n) dy }{\Delta} \right] +A - \frac{\rho(y)}{e \gamma} - e \eps_2 \mathcal{E}_z(y) d_1.
\eeq
\end{widetext}
The latter equation can be solved iteratively\footnote{The function $U(y)$ is interpolated with $\sim 50 $ points and iterations are done as $U_{new} = \alpha U(U_{old}) + (1- \alpha) U_{old}$ with
a factor $\alpha \leq 1 $ small enough to reach convergence.
At small $\Delta$ the non-linearity gets strong and we need to choose rather small values $\alpha \sim 0.001$ to achieve convergence.}.
% Note that the difference between G/SiC and graphene transferred into an FET is determined by the screening role of the surface states in the carbon dead layer on SiC.
The results of numerical solution of \eq{StripsSiC}
%ing behavior of $E_G(y)$% and $\nu(y)$
are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes},
%For small values of work function difference $A$,
where flat intervals of potential (precursors of compressible stripes) are formed:
those are about $\sim l_B$ (or $\sim 2\, l_B$ for $\nu = -2$) narrower than what was expected
from the quasi-classical estimations. Note that the non-locality in \eq{StripsSiC} arizes due to a finite ($|y-y_0|\sim l_B$) extent of the wave function, rather than long-range Coulomb interactions (as
it would be in a 2DEG in GaAs/AlGaAs \cite{Gerhards88, Shklovskii92, Chalker93, Fogler94, GerhardsCurrents} or in a GraFET, Section \ref{sec:StripsStandard}).
{We note a significant particle-hole ($\nu = \pm 2$) asymmetry of the potential profile that is caused by a significant initial n-doping of G/SiC: the gate potential has the same sign for both $\nu = +2 $ and $\nu = -2$
but it is stronger for $\nu = -2$.}
%These flat regions are related to flat intervals of electronic dispersion, known as compressible stripes.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.492]{PlotEG5T1.pdf}
% \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{PlotEG10T.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.487]{PlotEGm25T1.pdf}\\
\hspace{-0.74mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4915]{PlotEG15T.pdf}
% \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{PlotEG10T.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.488]{PlotEGm215T.pdf}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\caption{\label{fig:Stripes}
Self-consistent electrostatic potential induced in G/SiC for $B=5$ T and $B=15$ T, bulk filling factor $\nu=\pm 2$ (left/right columns) $d=50, 100, 200, 400 \nm$ (top to bottom).
Fermi level is chosen as $\mu = \pm \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \frac{ \hbar v }{l_B} $, corresponding to the middle of the gap for $\nu = \pm 2 $.
{Dashed line corresponds to quasiclassical calculation, \eq{FillingClassical1}; solid lines are self-consistent calculation, \eq{StripsSiC}. }
For $B=15$ T, we illustrate the effect of interaction-induced level splitting by $6 \, \rm m\eV$.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
% \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{PlotEGm210T.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{Spectrum250_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrum250_pi2.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrumm250_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrumm250_pi2.png} \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{Spectrum2100_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrum2100_pi2.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrumm2100_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrumm2100_pi2.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{Spectrum2200_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrum2200_pi2.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrumm2200_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrumm2200_pi2.png}\\
% \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{Spectrum100N.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.3]{Spectrum100Pi2N.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{Spectrum2400_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrum2400_pi2.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrumm2400_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{Spectrumm2400_pi2.png}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\caption{\label{fig:spectrum}
%Dotted lines indicate the quasi-classical approximation, parameteres of surface states are fixed to
%$\gamma = 2 \,\eV^{-1} \nm^{-2} $, $d_1 = 0.3 \nm $, $A=0.2\, \eV$.
Electronic spectrum in magnetic field $B=5$ T calculated for two examples of boundary conditions: $\phi=0$ and $\phi = \pi/2 $ and for filling factors $\nu = \pm 2$.
Edge states correspond to levels crossing the Fermi-level,
compressible stripes correspond to flat intervals of dispersion at $E = \mu$. Black/red color corresponds to different $\pm K$ valleys. Extra branches for $\nu=-2$ are the evanescent waves, localized in the area of large
potential near the edge (similar to ``whispering gallery'' modes in Ref. \onlinecite{WhisperingGallery0,WhisperingGallery}).
%We see that compressible stripes tend to appear for higher $d$, and higher magnetic fields.
%Small humps near the region of fast decrease of external potential in case $\nu=-2$ appear due to
%a local minumum of $\psi_{-1,y_0}(y)^2$ at $y=y_0$, leading to ``overscreening'' phenomenon.
}
\end{figure*}
Also, at distances $\sim l_B$ near the edge, the electronic wave functions do not have Gaussian shape,
but this
%does not affect our results and
can be incorporated in the change of boundary conditions for Dirac electrons, as discussed below\footnote{
The boundary conditions can be used to incorporate the sample-dependent variations of potential near the edge of graphene,
which arise due to chemical and electrostatic modification of the edge.
To consider the effect of a large potential $U(y)$ near the edge,
%that decays
%to a constant away from the edge,
%$U(y) \approx U_1/\sqrt{y} + U_0 $, we
let us start solving the Dirac equation from a point $y_0>0$, hence, we need a new boundary condition, $\phi(y_0)$.
%, where the potential is no longer so large. The energy can then be approximated as the energy of the solution for $U=0$ with new ``renormalized''
%boundary condition $\phi(y_0)$, plus a leading perturbative correction $\int_{y_0}^\infty | \psi(y)|^2 U(y) dy $. To find $\phi(y_0)$,
We find that \Eq{DiracGen}
leads to
%$\frac{d}{d y} \frac{\psi_1}{\psi_2} = -2 \left (p + \frac{y}{l_B^2} \right) + \frac{E-U}{\hbar v} \left (\frac{\psi_1}{\psi_2} + \frac{\psi_2}{\psi_1} \right) $, that,
%in terms of angle $\phi$, reads:
%Derivation is given in the file:
%the equation
$$
\frac{d}{d y} \phi(y) = 2 \frac{U(y)-E }{\hbar v} + 2 \(p+\frac{y}{l_B^2}\) \pm \sin \phi(y),
$$
producing a flow of boundary conditions for valleys $\pm K$ (we do not loose solutions in this procedure if the second, nonlinear, term
%in \eq{RatioEquation}
can be neglected relative to the first term).
%from $y=0$ to $y=y_0$.
This flow depends on valley, $p$ and $E$, producing a more general class of $E$-- and $p$-- dependent boundary
conditions. Considering the flow in the region of large $|U|$ ($|E| \ll |U(y)| $ for $y<y_0$), and concentrating on low $|p|$,
leads to an approximate equation %then the $E$-- and $p$-- dependencies can be neglected
%and we see that $\phi$ flows as
$\frac{d}{d y} \phi(y) \approx 2 \frac{U(y)}{\hbar v} $.
It means that when $U(y)$ is positive (negative) near the edge, the
effective boundary parameter
increases (decreases) as we move away from the edge.
%, $\phi(y_0)> ( < )\phi(0)$.
As a result, the sample-dependent details of the potential near the edge can be absorbed into a renormalization of $\phi$.
For example, the standard zigzag boundary conditions, $\phi(0)=0$, behave similarly to $\phi \approx \pi/4$ in G/SiC at $\nu=2$.
%The renormalization of $\phi$ is particularly important for the dispersion branch originating from
%zigzag-like edge states, that for $U=0$ and $B=0$ exist for $\xi p \cos \phi >0$,
%and have linear dispersion $E(p) = \xi \hbar v p \sin \phi$ with the wave function
%$\Psi_\xi = \left[\ba{c} \xi \\ \left( \tan \frac{\phi}{2} \right)^\xi \ea \right] e^{- \xi p y \cos \phi+i p x}$.
%These modes were recently shown to be important for current conductance in graphene \cite{EdgeConductionChannels, EdgeCurrents16}.
%Note that the dispersion branch of zigzag-like edge states points upwards from the K points for $0<\phi<\pi/2$ and downwards for $\pi/2 <\phi < \pi $.
%With large positive $U(y)$ near the edge, $\phi$ is renormalized upwards and the energy is corrected upwards by $\int_{y_0}^\infty | \psi(y)|^2 U(y) dy $.
%In our calculations (see Fig. \ref{fig:spectrum}) for $\nu = 2$ with $\phi = 0$, the renormalized $\phi$ falls in the range $0<\phi<\pi/2$ pushing the zigzag edge modes to be
%always above the Fermi level,
%while for $\phi = \pi/2 $ the renormalized $\phi$ falls in the range $\pi/2<\phi<\pi$, making the dispersion of zigzag modes to point down
%and cross the Fermi-level, producing extra pairs of edge states.
%Mixing of Gaussian magnetic modes with evanescent modes can be seen in ,
%explaining a non-Gaussian shape of the extra edge mode at $d=200 \nm$ (see the inset in Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes}).
%The argument of Refs. [\onlinecite{StripeHubbard}], [\onlinecite{EdgeConductionChannels}] suggests that if the branch of evanescent modes
%goes downwards, $\pi/2>\phi>\pi $, then filling of
%these states will be self-consistently related with the potential at the edge, while this will not happen for $0<\phi<\pi/2$.
Note that at large and wide potential near the edge (as happens for $\nu=-2$ in our discussion), moving $y_0$ to the safe region of low potential will involve $\phi$
making several $2 \pi$ turns, resulting in the loss of several solutions, corresponding to extra evanescent modes\cite{WhisperingGallery0,WhisperingGallery}}.
%with width
%(momentum is again identified with the coordinate via $p = y/l_B^2$)
%$\sim 2 l_B$ smaller, than the width of flat region in the potential, see Fig. \ref{fig:spectra}. Thus, depending on the
%relevant LL, the quasi-classical calculation overestimates the width of compressible stripe by $\sim 3 l_B$ for the 0-th LL or by even more for other LLs.
% Finite
%LL broadening limits the compressibility of the stripes, setting the drift velocity to $v_{edge} \sim \Delta/l_{stripe}$.
%For lower distances to the gate, $d$,
%where lower gate voltage is needed to get QHE plateau in the bulk,
%the extra edge channel is formed closer to the edge, where the derivative of gate-induced potential is larger and the edge channel is not reconstructed into a compressible
%stripe. %tilting the otherwise flat bit of dispersion by $\sim \Delta/l_\text{strip}$.
%even in the limit
%of zero Landau level broadening.
%If the gate voltage is larger, due to larger $A$ or
%For
%thicker PMMA layer, the extra edge states are moved further away from the boundary, with potential becoming shallow
%near the edge state. In this case, there is a tendency towards a formation of a narrow compressible strip near this point.
%, with any finite LL broadening making this compressible strip slightly dispersive.
%As a rough estimate, the edge velocity $v_e$ of the compressible strip times its width is of the order of LL broadening $\Delta$:
%$ v_{e} \approx \frac{\Delta}{l_\text{strip}} $. While is natural to expect that for small disorder $\Delta$ e-e interaction effects become important and spin and valley resolved edge states will form
%along the width of the compressible strip \cite{EdgeEquilibration}, we do not expect this to be observed in epitaxial graphene on SiC due to $\Delta \gtrsim 0.02 \eV$ \cite{Sasha3}.
%The slope of dispersion at this strip can be estimated analytically
%, and the effects
%can be approximated
%by solving \eq{ChargeTransfer2plate} with $n_G = 0$ and the number and location of edge states must be found from the numerical solution of Dirac equation with magnetic field, see Fig. \ref{fig:spectra}.
%This is valid if the edge state wave-function does not touch the edge. It can be extended, if still valid, to crossings with higher Landau levels by using the appropriate
%higher oscillator wave-functions.
%To study these edge states, which are affected by the actual termination of the 2D crystal, %in the immediate vicinity of the edge and compressible stripes
%we solve the
%We do not attempt to find the self-consistent
%potential closer to the edge\cite{StripeHubbard}, since the possible chemical functionalization of the edge can anyway modify the behavior of electrons near the edge.
%meter, that we denote by $\phi$.
%Instead, we show how the unknown details of large electrostatic potential in the immediate vicinity to the edge can be incorporated
%in the renormalization of the effective boundary condition for Dirac electrons.
%Dirac equation with self-consistent mean-field potential, $U(y)$, found using \eq{StripsSiC}, and
Generic boundary conditions \cite{Akhmerov1, FalkoBoundary, SSFalko}
for graphene electrons near the edge are:
\beq
\ba{c}
v \bm{\sigma} \cdot (-i \hbar {\bf \nabla} + e {\bf A}) \Psi = (E - U(y)) \Psi \; ; \\
\left[ 1 - ({\bm m} \cdot \bm{\tau}) \otimes ( {\bm n} \cdot \bm{\sigma} )] \Psi \right|_{y=0} = 0; \\
{\bm n} = \hat{\bf n}_z\, \cos \phi + [{\hat{\bf n}_z} \times {\bf n_\perp}]\, \sin \phi .
\ea
\label{DiracGen}
\eeq
Here, $\sigma_i$ and $\tau_i$ are Pauli matrices acting separately on sublattice ($A,B$) and valley ($\pm K$) components of a 4-spinor,
$\Psi^T = (\Psi_{KA}, \Psi_{KB}, \Psi_{-KB}, -\Psi_{-KA})$, describing
the electron amplitudes on sublattices $A$ and $B$ in the valleys $\pm K$. Coordinate axes here are the same as in electrostatics analysis: electrons move freely in half-plane: $-\infty<x<\infty, \,y>0,\, z=0$
with the straight edge $(x,y=0,z=0)$.
Generic boundary conditions \cite{Akhmerov1, FalkoBoundary, SSFalko} in \eq{DiracGen} are parameterized by two unit vectors, $\bm m$
and
%$\bm n$, with the condition
${\bm n} \perp {\bf n_\perp}$, where $\bf{n}_{\perp}$ is normal to
the edge and lays within the 2D plane of graphene. Both $\bm m$ and $\bm n$ depend on the microscopic features of the edge in a particular sample.
A rotation of multi-spinor $\Psi$ in the valley space can be used\cite{SSFalko} to set $\bm m = \hat{\bf n}_z$, so that angle $\phi$ (corresponding to the direction of vector $\bf{n}_{\perp}$) is the only
relevant boundary parameter ($\phi \in [0,\pi]$ and $\phi \to \phi + \pi$ is obtained by swapping the valleys).
%where $K=\pm 1 $ for valleys $\pm K$.
%}
%potential closer to the edge\cite{StripeHubbard}, since the possible chemical functionalization of the edge can anyway modify the behavior of electrons near the edge.
%meter, that we denote by $\phi$.
%Instead, we show how the unknown details of large electrostatic potential in the immediate vicinity to the edge can be incorporated
%in the renormalization of the effective boundary condition for Dirac electrons.
For calculating edge states, we use Landau gauge for vector potential, ${\bf A} = (B y, 0)$, and characterise states by wave-number $p$ along the edge, $\Psi(x,y) = e^{i p x} \psi(y) $.
Typical dispersions $E(p)$ are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:spectrum}.
%\gray{Here we do not maintain self-consistency in the calculation of the potential
%at distances $y<2 l_B$ since the detailed feature of potential at $y\sim l_B$ near the edge can be absorbed into the value of a boundary parameter $\phi$.}
These spectra are valley-degenerate away from the edge, while at distances $y\lesssim 2\, l_B$ ($-p\, l_B < 2 $) the valley degeneracy is broken.
When the top gate is close to graphene, e.g. $d \lesssim 50 \nm $, the spectrum is qualitatively similar to the case of zero potential\cite{SSFalko,EdgeStates1, EdgeStates2, Abanin2007, EdgeStates3, AbaninEdgeWithScreening},
though with some renormalization of $\phi$, caused by
potential variation at short distances ($y \lesssim l_B$) near the edge: we find\cite{Note3} that $\phi$ is effectively increased (decreased) by a positive (negative) peak of potential near the edge of graphene.
For such close gates, there is only one edge channel (per spin) with chirality prescribed by the bulk filling factor ($\nu=2$, or $\nu = -2$).
For $d\gtrsim 100 \nm$, the first pair of counter-propagating
edge channels starts to appear, as pointed in Fig. \ref{fig:spectrum} by an arrow.
%that is,
%instead of one edge channel in one of the valleys, growing $d$ leads to the appearance of a pair of valley-degenerate edge channels away from the edge
%(with Gaussian wave functions), while the original edge channel changes its valley and direction of propagation.
%, preserving the total Chern number. This conclusion is noteworthy: the fast-propagating
%outer edge channel changes its direction of propagation for $d\gtrsim 100 \nm$, while the total Chern number is maintained due to appearance of a slower valley-degenerate pair of inner edge channels.
%Depending on $\phi$, additional pairs of counter-propagating edge channels may appear near the edge, and the structure of their wave-functions would determine the possible
%disorder-induced mixing and equilibration of those edge channels.
We find that for $d \gtrsim 20 \, l_B$ ($d>200 \nm$ in Fig. \ref{fig:spectrum}) the edge channel starts to develop a narrow valley-degenerate compressible stripe.
Besides the above-listed features, common for $\nu=2$ and $\nu=-2$, there are the following notable differences between those two filling factors.
First of all, extra pairs of edge states and compressible stripes correspond to the 0-th LL for $\nu = 2$ and to the ``$n=-1$'' LL for $\nu = -2$.
Then, apart from the expected continuation of the bulk Landau levels, we observe extra branches of evanescent edge modes that generalize the
zigzag edge modes\cite{EdgeStates1, EdgeStates2, EdgeStates3, Abanin2007, AbaninEdgeWithScreening} to generic boundary conditions.
For $\nu=2$, there is only one such branch in each of the valleys, with its dispersion depending on the renormalized value of $\phi$.
It approaches the Fermi level at low values of $p\, l_B$, resulting in strong mixing with LL branches and multiple avoided crossings.
In G/SiC reaching $\nu=-2$ requires larger top-gate voltage, making the effects of external potential stronger. This is reflected in more evanescent modes, that cross Fermi level
at larger values of $|p\, l_B|$. Note that these edge modes are present even in a zero magnetic field and may be explained by full internal reflection from the potential wall\cite{WhisperingGallery0, WhisperingGallery}.
%Their wave functions are localized near the edge with their location not following the LL location rule $y \approx - p l_B^2$, so that evanescent and LL modes with the same $p$ are located at different distances from the edge,
%explaining a weaker mixing with LL branches at level-crossing points.
%Apart from the expected continuation of the bulk Landau levels, we also observe extra evanescent edge modes that mix with the Landau levels near the edge. These generalize the
%zigzag edge modes\cite{EdgeStates1, EdgeStates2, EdgeStates3, Abanin2007, AbaninEdgeWithScreening} to the generic boundary conditions. Their dispersion
%depends strongly on the boundary parameter $\phi$ and their wave-functions are strongly localised near the edge\cite{SSFalko}, especially at large $|p\, l_B|$, explaining the absence of
%mixing with LL states at large $- p\, l_B$. For larger and wider potential $U(y)$, as happens for the case of $\nu=-2$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes}), the number of evanescent edge
%modes increases,\red{ Fig. \ref{fig:spectrum}}, and these modes propagate along the edge in both directions, being well separated from the \red{edge channels} ``far away'' from the actual graphene edge.
%and may
%be understood as magnetic analog of whispering-gallery modes\cite{WhisperingGallery}, confined by the edge and by varying potential.
%For $\nu = -2$,
%We note that at large $p$ there may be two types of dispersion branches: the
%Landau levels with Gaussian wave functions centered around $ - l_B^2 p $, and the evanescent modes (zigzag-type edge states\cite{EdgeStates1, EdgeStates2,EdgeStates3}) with the
%wave function forced even closer against the edge
%by growing $|p|$. These two types of states mix, forming hybrid branches, but the mixing strength decays exponentially fast with growing $|p|$.
%The appearance of extra pairs of edge states
%in a range of boundary parameters $\phi$ can be ascribed to the mixing of LLs with evanescent modes, \cite{SSFalko}. This implies that all the wave-functions of extra edge states have significant support at the edge (the same
%conclusion follows from the sensitivity of the mode to the boundary condition $\phi$, see the inset of Fig. \ref{fig:spectra}), hence,
% the edge disorder will induce a backscattering between these modes. On the other hand, those valley-degenerate edge states predicted by quasi-classical analysis and its refinements, have low overlap with the edge and hence
%form well-defined chiral transport channels.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.825]{EGFET1.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{FETFilling1.pdf}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{\label{fig:SiO2}
Self-consistent potential (local Fermi energy), $\mu - U(y)$, and the filling factor, $\nu$, in GraFET.
Top gate voltage $V_g$ is tuned to achieve a midgap chemical potential in the center of a device, chosen to have a width $50\, d$.
Long-range Coulomb interaction leads to wide compressible stripes (corresponding to LL with $n=1$) developing already for $d \gtrsim 2\, l_B$.
%, correspond to regions of non-integer filling factor.
%A small spin/valley splitting is included to study the effect of interaction-induced ferromagnetism.
%Note that only the lowest spin or valley sublevel of the 1-st LL is reconstructed into a wide compressible stripe.
%The result is actually a function of $y/d$, so, for larger magnetic fields the stripes have roughly the same width.
}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{SpectrumSi_10_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{SpectrumSi_10_pi2.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.34]{SpectrumSi_20_0.png} \includegraphics[scale=0.33]{SpectrumSi_20_pi2.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{SpectrumSi_50_0.png} \\ \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{SpectrumSi_50_pi2.png}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\caption{\label{fig:spectrumFET}
Edge state dispersion in GraFET with boundary condition parameters $\phi=0$ and $\phi=\pi/2$, for $B = 5 \, \rm T$. Black/red color corresponds to different $\pm K$ valleys.
Compressible stripe starts to develop already for $d>2\, l_B \approx 20 \nm$, getting $\L \sim 20\, l_B$ wide at $d=5\, l_B$ and rapidly growing further with increasing $d$.
For $\phi=0$ note the appearance of an almost flat branch of evanescent edge modes below the Fermi level.
%Broadening of LLs is $\Delta = 20 \rm meV$.
%Distance of extra edge states from the edge scales linearly as $\approx 8/3 d$ (for $B=5$ T) and
%there are no extra edge states for $B=20 $T due to weak gating potential required to achive $\nu=2$ in the bulk of the sample for this case.
%Dotted lines correspond
%to classical approximation valid for $l_B \nabla U \ll \frac{\hbar v_F}{l_B}$, solid lines account for the Gaussian shape wave-functions.
}
\end{figure}
\section{Compressibility of QHE edge states in $\text{GraFETs}$} \label{sec:StripsStandard}
For comparison, in GraFETs, graphene doping is provided solely by electrons transferred from the gate.
%(like in devices made by graphene transfer on insulating substrates
%and doped by electrostatic gating),
%with the same parameters as in Fig. \ref{fig:GatingIllustration}.
In this case, we solve
%graphene sheet in magnetic field cannot be considered metallic and
%full
a self-consistent nonlinear integral equation\cite{Gerhards88, Shklovskii92, Chalker93, Fogler94, GerhardsCurrents}, desribing potential near GraFET edge,
%To show a distinction of epitaxial graphene on Si-terminated SiC from all other types of graphene, let us solve the problem of charge and
%potential distribution in graphene in magnetic field for the same geometry and dielectric constants as considered above, but in the absence of surface states in SiC.
%This problem is relevant for epitaxial graphene grown on C-terminated SiC, or any transferred exfoliated graphene.
% As pointed out in \cite{EdgeSiO2, Efetov}, the solution is very sensitive to the exact potential inside the bulk.
%Below we show the appearance of wide compressible strips, which justifies the use of quasi-classical approximation, $ 2 \pi l_B^2 n_G(y) = \nu(y) $.
%Solving \Eqs{FillingClassical}{nGEquation} together with \eq{KernelK} leads to
%\beq \label{KernelK1}
% E_G(y) = -e^2 \int_0^\infty K_\phi(y,y') n_G(y') dy' + e V_{g}
%\eeq
%and contains long-range Coulomb interactions.
%These equations are both non-local and non-linear.
\beq \label{KernelK3}
U(y) =\frac{\hbar v}{l_B} \kappa \int\limits_0^\infty \frac{dy'}{d} \nu(y') \sum_{n=0}^\infty \xi^n \ln\frac{(y'-y)^2 +
4 (n+1)^2 d^2}{
(y'-y)^2 + (2 n d)^2} ,
\eeq
with
$
\kappa = \frac{e^2}{(2 \pi)^2 \hbar v \eps_0 (\eps_1+\eps_2)}\frac{d}{l_B} \approx 0.05 \frac{d}{l_B} \nn
$ {(we use $\eps_1 = 9.7$, $ \eps_2 = 3.5 $)}
and
$ \nu(y) = \sum_{n=-N}^N 2\, {\rm Erf}\frac{\mu-U(y)-E_n}{\Delta} $.
% The above equation follows from the
%quasi-classical approximation $ 2 \pi l_B^2 n_G(y) = \nu(y) $
%applied to \eq{KernelK} and
The nonlocality in it is produced by the long-range nature of Coulomb potential, so that the ``edge-of-capacitor'' effect extends over longer distances, as compared to G/SiC system.
%\red{that are screened only at large scale $d$, as compared to small $d_1$ in case of G/SiC}.
This supports the use of quasi-classical approximation, $ 2 \pi l_B^2 n_G(y) = \nu(y) $, which is then justified by the results, Figs. \ref{fig:SiO2} and \ref{fig:spectrumFET},
showing compressible stripes with widths $\L \,\gg l_B$ that appear at $y \gg l_B$.
%, resulting in
%In the quasiclassical approximation $ 2 \pi l_B^2 n_G(y) = \nu(y) $, reducing the equation to
%\beq \label{KernelK3}
% E_G(y) = -\kappa \int_0^\infty \sum_{n=0}^\infty \xi^n \log\frac{(y'-y)^2 +
%(2 (n+1) )^2}{
%(y'-y)^2 + (2 n)^2} \nu(y') dy' + V_g,
%\eeq
Choosing the top-gate voltage,
$$ e V_g =\frac{\hbar v}{l_B} \left[ 2 \kappa \frac{2 \pi (\eps_1 + \eps_2)}{\eps_2} + \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\right], $$
to get $\nu = 2$ away from the boundary\footnote{
This equation is easily derived from the plain capacitor geometry and the requirement $\mu = \frac{\hbar v}{l_B} \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}$, $\rho =2 e /(2 \pi l_B^2) $
},
we solve \eq{KernelK3} numerically. For numerical simulations\cite{Note2}, we set width of $50\, d$ for the modeled GraFET device and tune chemical potential
to the middle of the gap in the center of the device.
The results of numerical simulations are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:SiO2} and the LL spectrum is plotted in Fig. \ref{fig:spectrumFET}. Results for $\nu = -2$ can be obtained by reversing
the sign of energy and changing\cite{SSFalko} $\phi \to -\phi$.
%Note that fixing the filling factor in the bulk requires a fine tuning.
As compared to the case of G/SiC, the opposite (positive) sign of top gate voltage is needed to dope
%an initially neutral
graphene to the
filling factor $\nu=2$, which leads to
a stronger electron doping near the edge. As a result, for increasing $d$, extra counter-propagating edge channels correspond to filling of the 1-st LL, in contrast to the 0-th LL
in case of $\nu=2$ in G/SiC.
Another difference is that the inner edge channel reconstructs easier into a wide compressible stripe (now, for the 1-st LL).
This starts to happen already at $d \sim 2 l_B$, and the compressible
stripe rapidly grows upon increasing $d$, see Figs. \ref{fig:SiO2} and \ref{fig:spectrumFET}.
This latter remark can be used to interpret the recent experiment \cite{EdgeSiO2},
where the formation of a wide compressible stripe has prevented the edge metallization contacts from measuring the $\nu = 2$ resistance plateau, despite the $\nu=2$ incompressible state in the bulk of the sample.
%stripe in a clean hBN-encapsulated device has been observed with the width of $\sim 1 {\rm \mu m}$ for $\nu = 2$ at $B = 9\, $T in a structure with $d = 300 \nm$.
%When we include a small spin or valley level splitting, the stripe is split into two in grossly uneven proportions: the inner stripe with filling factor in the range $2 < \nu <4$ is much wider
%than the following stripe with filling factor $4 < \nu < 6 $, as
%shown in Fig. \ref{fig:SiO2}. Going beyond the quasiclassical limit, would lead to significant overlap of the two stripes if the width
%of the second stripe is comparable to $l_B$.
%At the same time, the further edge states
%near graphene edge are not reconstructed into compressible stripes.
%Similar results were anticipated in Refs. \onlinecite{KhaetskiiFalko, Efetov} but,
%surprizingly, we observe that the compressible stripe can be notably longer than $d$.
%The precise length of the inner stripe depends on the strength of the disorder that helps to
%pin the integer filling factor away from the boundary and falls in the range of $2 d$ to $5 d$, as is evident from Fig. \ref{fig:SiO2}.
%\red{We observe that compressible stripe length can notably exceed $d$ in the FET setup, because Coulomb interactions
%are not fully screened by the top gate at scale $d$ with some field lines escaping via the bottom insulator.}
%Our results agree with the recent
%experiment \cite{EdgeSiO2}, where the compressible
%stripe in a clean hBN-encapsulated device has been observed with the width of $\sim 1 {\rm \mu m}$ for $\nu = 2$ at $B = 9\, $T in a structure with $d = 300 \nm$.
%The origin of such behavior is in the long-range Coulomb interaction mediated by the
%part of the top gate that extends to $y<0$, Fig. \ref{fig:GatingIllustration}.
%field lines that exit near graphene edge
%into SiC (similarly to weakly-decaying part in \eq{rhoEq}).
%To corroborate the numerical results, let us estimate the location $y \in [l, L]$ of the compressible stripe with the following analytical argument.
%The beginning, $l$, can be estimated from \eq{rhoEq} by demanding $\rho(l) = 6 e \frac{e B}{h}$ (i.e. $\nu = 6 $), neglecting
%the long-range Coulomb interactions compared to the steep potential from the charge accumulation near the edge. This leads to $ l \approx 0.19 d $, independently of the magnetic length $l_B$.
%To estimate $L$, we demand
%that $E_G(L) = 1/\sqrt{2}$ in \eq{KernelK3} (this is the asymptotic value, corresponding to the mid-point between the 0-th and the 1-st LLs),
%which involves the long range Coulomb interaction $K_\phi(y,y') \underset{y-y' \gg d}{\sim} 1/(y-y')^2 $ convolved with
%the filling factor, which could be estimated from the result for a metallic plate (see \eq{rhoEq}):
%$\nu(0<y<L) \approx \frac{2}{ \sqrt{1-e^{-\frac{\pi}{2} y/d} }} + \frac{1}{ \sqrt{y/d}} $.
% Irrespective of the approximations used for $\nu(y)$, \eq{KernelK3} shows that compressible stripe length (in units of $d$) grows with $d/l_B$,
%achieving saturation when $\kappa \approx 0.05 d/l_B$ becomes large. The result of this estimate is shown on Fig. \ref{fig:StripeSiO2} together with the exact numerical results.
%In case of transferred graphene,
%extra edge channels start to appear significantly earlier, for $d>20 \nm \approx 2 l_B$, and the innermost channel degenerates into compressible
%stripe right at the outset.
%Using the fit $\sum_{n=0}^\infty \xi^n \log\frac{(y'-y)^2 +
%(2 (n+1) )^2}{
%(y'-y)^2 + (2 n)^2} \approx \frac{d}{l_B (2 + (y-y'))^2}$, we get
%(in dimensionless units defined above). The compressible strip has an excess filling factor that starts to grow linearly from 2 to higher value along the strip: $\nu(x) \approx 2+ (L-y)/L, \, y<L $.
%This estimate should be corrected at small $y$, since the filling factor grows much faster there
%This should compensate for the fact that graphene is absent for $y<0$ and lead to
%approximately the same potential near the end of the strip (at $y=L$), as the one deep inside the bulk: $\int_{0}^L \nu(y) K_{\phi}(L, y) dy \approx \int_{-\infty}^L 2 K_{\phi}(L,y) dy $.
%This leads to $L \approx \sqrt{2} e^2 \approx 10 $. This estimate is valid only for $L \gg 2$, when the effect from the rise of the density near the edge can be neglected.
%Note that compressible region is metallic, and hence
%the analytical fit for $\rho(y)$, \eq{rhoEq}, may be applied. Importantly, it contains the term that decay as $1/\sqrt{y}$ away from the boundary, without the $e^{-y/d}$ exponential suppression, while the
%potential (defined by the electric field above graphene), settles to a constant exponentially fast away from the edge. Thus, the strip width may be estimated from the location of the point $y_1$,
%where $\rho(y_1)/(-e) = \frac{2}{2 \pi l_B^2} $, corresponding to filling factor $2$.
%The gate voltage is fixed to $V_g = \frac{\hbar v}{\sqrt{2} l_B}$ to get $\nu = 2$ in the bulk and from \eq{rhoEq} we derive:
\section{Discussions and conclusions} \label{sec:Conclusions}
The analysis of the electrostatics of QHE edge states in graphene presented in Sections \ref{sec:electrostatics} - \ref{sec:StripsStandard}
%in graphene in G/SiC and in GraFETs, here, we
establishes that formation of compressible stripes near the edge is suppressed in G/SiC, as compared to GraFETs and 2DEG in GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructures.
Numerical solutions of \Eqs{StripsSiC}{KernelK3} for the potential and \eq{DiracGen} for the spectrum allows us to calculate the width, $\Delta p$, of flat interval in the dispersion at the Fermi level
(where
$E(p)=\mu$). The corresponding states are located at $y \approx -p\, l_B^2$ thus forming a compressible stripe of width
$\L = l_B^2 \Delta p$. To illustrate the result quantatively,
we choose the device parameters that provide $\nu = \pm 2$ QHE plateaux for $B = 5$ Tesla and $B=15$ Tesla, motivated by
the implementation of G/SiC in the primary\cite{Sasha2} (15 Tesla range) and a ``push-button''\cite{Rozhko} (5 Tesla range) quantum resistance standards
by National Physical Laboratory (UK) and Oxford Instruments PLC.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{StripeWidth2new5.pdf}\\
\vspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{StripeWidthm2new5.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7 cm}
\caption{\label{fig:StripeWidth}
Compressible stripe width, $\L$, near the $\nu = \pm 2$ QHE edge in graphene in G/SiC (squares) and GraFET (circles)
%Width of flat $E(p)=\mu$ region in edge state dispersion (compressible stripe) in units of $l_B$.
%(which may be expressed as a spatial width via the quasiclassical correspondence $y \approx - p l_B$)
as a function of a distance to the top gate, $d$, for $B=5$ T (filled symbols)
and $B=15$ T (open symbols). Note the difference between r.h.s. and l.h.s. axes, stressing the fact that compressible stripes in GraFETs are much wider than
in G/SiC.
%Empty/filled squares are for G/SiC, $B=15 \,{\rm T}\, /\, 5$ T; empty/filled circles are for GraFET, $B=15 \,{\rm T}\, / \, 5$ T. %The results for G/SiC were fitted with \eq{StripeWidth}, subtracting $2\, l_B$ for $\nu=2$ or $4\, l_B$ for $\nu=-2$. Data uncertainty is of order of $l_B$.
%other parameteres are fixed to
%$\gamma = 2 \eV^{-1} \nm^{-2} $, $d_1 = 0.3 \nm $, $A=0.2 \eV$. Top/bottom panels are for $\nu = \pm 2$ in the bulk. Note, that the stripes are much wider than in the case of SiC epitaxial graphene
}
%the quasi-classical calcualtion predicts them to be shorter than $2 l_B$ ($4 l_B$).}
\end{figure}
The results for the compressible stripe length, $\L$, are gathered in Fig.\ref{fig:StripeWidth} fro both G/SiC and GraFETs.
%in the same environment and pinpoint the main differences, summarized in Sec. \ref{sec:Conclusions}.
They highlight an essential feature of G/SiC determined by the presence of surface states in the ``dead layer'' of SiC surface,
which leads to significant electron doping of graphene (so that the opposite signs of gate potentials are needed to achieve $\nu = 2 $ in G/SiC and in GraFETs)
and to an efficient electrostatic screening.
%of long-range electrostatic interactions in graphene.
%This feature of charge transfer between graphene and SiC surface causes the following difference of its edge properties from the edge properties of GraFETs in the QHE regime:
%\begin{enumerate}[label=(\alph*), wide, labelwidth=!, labelindent=0pt]
%\item
As a result,
compressible stripes in G/SiC are possible only for
%$\sim 10$ times larger
distances $d \gtrsim 20\, l_B$ between graphene and the gate,
and even then their widths, $\L$, are order of magnitude smaller than in GraFETs, Fig. \ref{fig:StripeWidth}.
Semiclassically, one would estimate\cite{Shklovskii92,KhaetskiiFalko} $\L$
% in G/SiC,
as a distance
%can be estimated\cite{Shklovskii92,Fogler94, Efetov} from \eq{ChargeTransfer2plate}
at which the filling factor changes by 4, which would give a linear dependence for G/SiC \footnote{To estimate $\L$ we use \eq{ChargeTransfer2plate}. The dependence $\L \propto d$ follows from the scaling
$\mathcal{E}_z(y ; d) = \tilde{\mathcal{E}}_z (y/d)/d$ and $\rho(y; d) = \tilde \rho (y/d)/d$ in \Eq{rhoEq}.},
%\cite{Shklovskii92},
%(we neglect the spin splitting here), while $E_G$ is fixed at the LL,
$$ %\label{StripeWidth}
\L \approx \left. \frac{4 e B}{h \gamma_{\rm eff} \left|\frac{\d_y \rho(y)}{e \gamma} + \d_y \mathcal{E}_z(y) e \eps_2 d_1 \right|} \right|_{\hspace{-0.3cm}\ba{cc} & \scriptstyle
y=y_c, \\ &\scriptstyle U(y_c) = \mu \ea } \hspace{-0.2cm} \propto d .
%\hspace{-0.5cm}\propto d.
$$
Note that by the definition in \eq{ChargeTransfer2plate}, $\gamma_{\rm eff} < \eps_0 d_1/e^2$, whereas would it be formally set to $\gamma_{\rm eff} \to \infty$, no compressible stripe could form.
Also, magnetic field dependence of $\L$ is different from linear, because at fixed filling factor in the 2D bulk, changing magnetic field would be accompanied by changing gate voltage (hence, $\mathcal{E}_z$ and
$\rho$ are changing). For example, at large magnetic fields ($B \sim 20$ T), no gate voltage is needed to get $\nu=2$ in the bulk
and no compressible stripes are expected, while for $\nu=-2$ the needed gate volatage increases with magnetic field, which may lead to wider compressible stripe at larger $B$.
%while the width in energy space (dispersion) is estimated as $\Delta$.
%Solving for the position, $y_c$, of a stripe center, we find conditions for the stripes formation, which will be discussed in detail in Section \ref{sec:Conclusions}.
The above quasiclassical estimate agrees with the results shown in Fig. \ref{fig:StripeWidth}
upon subtraction of $\sim 2 \, l_B$ for $\nu=2$ and $\sim 4 \, l_B$ for $\nu=-2$, which
accounts for a finite extent, $\sim l_B $, of electron wave functions in the relevant LLs.
The latter difference is one of the manifestations of the ``electron-hole'' asymmetry of QHE edge states in G/SiC, in contrast to ``e-h'' ($\nu \to - \nu$) symmetry of QHE edge states in GraFETs.
%For $\nu=-2$, the stripes are slightly wider than for $\nu = +2$ and located further away from the edge.
%
%Also, GraFETs behave symmetrically with respect to the change of sign of doping, $\nu \to - \nu$, whereas G/SiC behave asymmetrically.
This ``e-h'' asymmetry of G/SiC is determined by that
%This is because the sign of top-gate potential is not changed when going from $\nu=2$ to $\nu=-2$ in G/SiC, instead, $\nu=-2$ requires a larger top-gate voltage
reverting graphene doping from n-type ($\nu=2$)
%, determined by the charge transfer from SiC surface states
to p-type ($\nu = -2$)
requires further increasing gate voltage rather than reverting the sign of gate voltage as in the case of GraFET.
%making the effects of external potential stronger.
The resulting potential inhomogeneity near the edge is stronger for $\nu=-2$ in G/SiC, leading to a
larger number of counter-propagating pairs of evanescent edge
modes that are present even at zero magnetic field \cite{WhisperingGallery0, WhisperingGallery}.
{Counter-propagating modes lead to dissipative QHE \cite{DissipativeHall07} unless they are not gapped by 1D localization, induced by inter-channel scattering. }
%, these are confined near the edge by a strong potential inhomogeneity.
A sharper potential near the edge and narrower (or fully suppressed) compressible stripes in G/SiC would make equilibration\cite{EdgeEquilibration, Kovrizhin, PartialEquilibration09, EdgeEquilibration14} of edge channels
faster than in GraFETs with similar parameters. At the same time, cooling of edge state electrons by phonon emission\cite{SSFalko} would be slower in G/SiC, with hot electrons spreading to longer distances along the edge.
%is order of magnitude larger than in G/SiC, symmetric in the filling factor
%and depends in a universal way on the magnetic length and device geometry, Fig. \ref{fig:StripeWidth}.
%In particular, the compressible stripes correspond to the 0-th LL for $\nu=2$ in G/SiC, -1-st LL for $\nu=-2$
%in G/SiC, and to the $\pm$1-st LL for $\nu = \pm 2$ in GraFET, see Figs. \ref{fig:spectrum} and \ref{fig:spectrumFET}.
%\item if spin and(or) valley splitting of LLs is considered, the compressible stripe would be divided into sub-stripes of comparable lengths for G/SiC, while for GraFET
%the inner stripe will be much wider than the outer one, Fig. \ref{fig:SiO2}.
%\end{enumerate}
%Screening of long range electrostatic interactions by SiC surface states results in much weaker tendency
%to formation of compressible stripes in G/SiC, than in graphene transferred into an FET, as summarized in Fig. \ref{fig:StripeWidth}.
%The width of the compressible stripe (see \Eq{StripeWidth}) is determined by the LL degeneracy ($\sim B$),
%the efficiency of charge transfer from the dead layer, $\gamma_{\rm eff}$, and the slope of gate-induced electrostatic potential.
%It is different for the different signs of the filling factor, due to different
%strength of the required gate potential, Fig. \ref{fig:StripeWidth}.
%The presented analysis beyond the quasi-classical approximation shows that when quasiclassics predict a stripe width below $\sim 2 l_B$ for $\nu = 2$ or below
%$\sim 4 l_B$ for $\nu = -2$, there are no compressible stripes at all.
%in a wide range of device parameters where the there are no compressible
%stripes at all in G/SiC.
%If a spin and(or) valley splitting of LLs is considered, the stripe would be divided into sub-stripes of almost equal lengths, in contrast to graphene in G/SiO$_2$/Si FET configuration (Sec. \ref{sec:StripsStandard}).
%It should be mentioned that we have not accounted for polarization of electronic orbitals that would effectively reduce the electric field between
%graphene and SiC surface states. This effect can be included by introducing an effective dielectric constant $\eps>1$ into \eq{ChargeTransfer2plate} as
%$ \frac{1}{\gamma_{\rm eff}} \equiv \frac{1}{\gamma} + \frac{d_1 e^2}{\eps \eps_0} $ and leads to increase of $\gamma_{\rm eff}$ which, according to \eq{StripeWidth}, would reduce the
%quasiclassical result for compressible stripe width and widen the range of G/SiC device parameters where no compressible stripes are predicted.
%For example, $\nu = 2$ at $B = 15 \,\rm T$ requires almost no gate voltage and the spectrum of edge states is that of the constant potential case\cite{Abanin2007, SSFalko},
%while for $\nu = -2$ pronounced compressibe stripes are formed.
%At the same time, the compressible stripe width for graphene transferred into an FET is order of magnitude larger, symmetric in the filling factor
%and depends in a universal way on the magnetic length and device geometry, Fig. \ref{fig:StripeWidth}.
%Possible interaction-induced spin or valley ferromagnetism leads to splitting of the compressible stripe in comparable proportions for G/SiC and
%in grossly uneven propertions in case of an FET geometry (only the inner compressible stripe is wide). Furter to that, in G/SiC we expect the interaction effects to be suppressed by the screening effect of SiC surface states.
%Another important effect we find is that for $d \gtrsim10 \, l_B$ for G/SiC or $d \gtrsim 2 \, l_B$ for graphene in an FET \cite{Efetov}, extra pairs of counterpropagating
%edge states start to appear, see Figs. \ref{fig:spectrum} and \ref{fig:spectrumFET}.
%In case of an FET setup, extra states are almost immediately reconstructed into a compressible stripe, while for G/SiC compressble stripes
%may appear only at large $d$, where the gate-induced potential is very shalow.
%Out of the additional counter-propagating edge channels, the outer edge channels feel graphene edge (i.e. are affected by infinitely sharp edge-termination potential) and
%hence have higher group velocity than the
%inner ones.
%This finding affects the discussion of cooling\cite{SSFalko} and equilibration\cite{EdgeEquilibration, Kovrizhin, PartialEquilibration09, EdgeEquilibration14} of edge channels.
%Namely, the outer edge channels would carry non-equilibrium distribution to longer distances.
%These states play an important role in transporting current
%and heat in QHE devices. As studied in Ref.\onlinecite{SSFalko}, the heat is transported further away by the fast edge channels, while the slow ones are cooled down by phonon emission at short
%distances.
% Figs. \ref{fig:SiO2},\ref{fig:Stripes} show that outer edge channels are generically fast, $v_{edge} \approx v $, while the innermost edge channel is slow, so,
%the heat propagates to longer distances in the direction of the outer edge states.
%For transferred graphene, the heat direction thus coincides with the direction of the total chiral edge current, while for $\nu = 2$ G/SiC we see (see e.g. $\nu=2, d=200 \nm$ in Fig. \ref{fig:Stripes})
%that the heat propagates to longer distances in the
%direction opposite to the total chiral current. Experimental verification of this prediction is currently underway.
{\it Acknowledegements} We acknowledge useful discussions with K. von Klitzing, S.~Rozhko, A.~Tzalenchuk, J.T.~Janssen, R.~Nicholas, F.~Essler, J.~Wallbank, M.~Ben Shalom and constructive remarks of the Referees.
This work was funded by Innovate UK grant 65431-468182 and the European Graphene Flagship project.
%merlin.mbs apsrev4-1.bst 2010-07-25 4.21a (PWD, AO, DPC) hacked
%Control: key (0)
%Control: author (8) initials jnrlst
%Control: editor formatted (1) identically to author
%Control: production of article title (-1) disabled
%Control: page (0) single
%Control: year (1) truncated
%Control: production of eprint (-1) disabled
\begin{thebibliography}{56}%
\makeatletter
\providecommand \@ifxundefined [1]{%
\@ifx{#1\undefined}
}%
\providecommand \@ifnum [1]{%
\ifnum #1\expandafter \@firstoftwo
\else \expandafter \@secondoftwo
\fi
}%
\providecommand \@ifx [1]{%
\ifx #1\expandafter \@firstoftwo
\else \expandafter \@secondoftwo
\fi
}%
\providecommand \natexlab [1]{#1}%
\providecommand \enquote [1]{``#1''}%
\providecommand \bibnamefont [1]{#1}%
\providecommand \bibfnamefont [1]{#1}%
\providecommand \citenamefont [1]{#1}%
\providecommand \href@noop [0]{\@secondoftwo}%
\providecommand \href [0]{\begingroup \@sanitize@url \@href}%
\providecommand \@href[1]{\@@startlink{#1}\@@href}%
\providecommand \@@href[1]{\endgroup#1\@@endlink}%
\providecommand \@sanitize@url [0]{\catcode `\\12\catcode `\$12\catcode
`\&12\catcode `\#12\catcode `\^12\catcode `\_12\catcode `\%12\relax}%
\providecommand \@@startlink[1]{}%
\providecommand \@@endlink[0]{}%
\providecommand \url [0]{\begingroup\@sanitize@url \@url }%
\providecommand \@url [1]{\endgroup\@href {#1}{\urlprefix }}%
\providecommand \urlprefix [0]{URL }%
\providecommand \Eprint [0]{\href }%
\providecommand \doibase [0]{http://dx.doi.org/}%
\providecommand \selectlanguage [0]{\@gobble}%
\providecommand \bibinfo [0]{\@secondoftwo}%
\providecommand \bibfield [0]{\@secondoftwo}%
\providecommand \translation [1]{[#1]}%
\providecommand \BibitemOpen [0]{}%
\providecommand \bibitemStop [0]{}%
\providecommand \bibitemNoStop [0]{.\EOS\space}%
\providecommand \EOS [0]{\spacefactor3000\relax}%
\providecommand \BibitemShut [1]{\csname bibitem#1\endcsname}%
\let\auto@bib@innerbib\@empty
%</preamble>
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Klitzing}}\ \emph {et~al.}(1980)\citenamefont
{{Klitzing}}, \citenamefont {{Dorda}},\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Pepper}}}]{vonKlitzing80}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {K.~V.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Klitzing}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {G.}~\bibnamefont {{Dorda}}},
\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.}~\bibnamefont {{Pepper}}},\
}\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.45.494} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {45}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {494} (\bibinfo {year} {1980})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Laughlin}}(1981)}]{Laughlin81}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.~B.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Laughlin}}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.23.5632} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {\prb}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {23}},\
\bibinfo {pages} {5632} (\bibinfo {year} {1981})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Niu}\ \emph {et~al.}(1985)\citenamefont {Niu},
\citenamefont {Thouless},\ and\ \citenamefont {Wu}}]{EdgeThouless2}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {Q.}~\bibnamefont
{Niu}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.~J.}\ \bibnamefont {Thouless}}, \
and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {Y.-S.}\ \bibnamefont {Wu}},\ }\href
{\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.31.3372} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {31}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {3372} (\bibinfo {year} {1985})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Niu}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Thouless}(1987)}]{EdgeThouless1}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {Q.}~\bibnamefont
{Niu}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.~J.}\ \bibnamefont
{Thouless}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.35.2188} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{35}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {2188} (\bibinfo {year} {1987})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {B\"uttiker}(1988)}]{ButtikerChiral}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.}~\bibnamefont
{B\"uttiker}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.38.9375} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{38}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {9375} (\bibinfo {year} {1988})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {von Klitzing}(1986)}]{vonKlitzing86}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {K.}~\bibnamefont {von
Klitzing}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/RevModPhys.58.519} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Rev. Mod. Phys.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{58}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {519} (\bibinfo {year} {1986})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Alphenaar}\ \emph {et~al.}(1990)\citenamefont
{Alphenaar}, \citenamefont {McEuen}, \citenamefont {Wheeler},\ and\
\citenamefont {Sacks}}]{EdgeEquilibration}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {B.~W.}\ \bibnamefont
{Alphenaar}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {P.~L.}\ \bibnamefont
{McEuen}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.~G.}\ \bibnamefont {Wheeler}},
\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.~N.}\ \bibnamefont {Sacks}},\
}\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.64.677} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {64}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {677} (\bibinfo {year} {1990})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Martin}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Feng}(1990)}]{MartinFeng90}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont
{Martin}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont {Feng}},\
}\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.64.1971} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {64}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {1971} (\bibinfo {year} {1990})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {G\"uven}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Gerhardts}(2003)}]{GerhardsCurrents}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {K.}~\bibnamefont
{G\"uven}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.~R.}\ \bibnamefont
{Gerhardts}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.67.115327} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{67}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {115327} (\bibinfo {year} {2003})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Ki}}\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Lee}}(2009)}]{PartialEquilibration09}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.-K.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Ki}}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {H.-J.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Lee}}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.195327} {\bibfield {journal}
{\bibinfo {journal} {\prb}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {79}},\ \bibinfo
{eid} {195327} (\bibinfo {year} {2009})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Kovrizhin}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Chalker}(2011)}]{Kovrizhin}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.~L.}\ \bibnamefont
{Kovrizhin}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~T.}\ \bibnamefont
{Chalker}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.84.085105} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{84}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {085105} (\bibinfo {year} {2011})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Granger}}\ \emph {et~al.}(2009)\citenamefont
{{Granger}}, \citenamefont {{Eisenstein}},\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Reno}}}]{2DEGHeat}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {G.}~\bibnamefont
{{Granger}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~P.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Eisenstein}}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~L.}\
\bibnamefont {{Reno}}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.086803}
{\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf
{\bibinfo {volume} {102}},\ \bibinfo {eid} {086803} (\bibinfo {year}
{2009})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Nam}\ \emph {et~al.}(2013)\citenamefont {Nam},
\citenamefont {Hwang},\ and\ \citenamefont {Lee}}]{GrapheneExperiment}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.-G.}\ \bibnamefont
{Nam}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {E.~H.}\ \bibnamefont {Hwang}}, \
and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {H.-J.}\ \bibnamefont {Lee}},\ }\href
{\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.226801} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {110}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {226801} (\bibinfo {year} {2013})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Slizovskiy}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Fal'ko}(2017)}]{SSFalko}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Slizovskiy}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.}~\bibnamefont
{Fal'ko}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.96.075434} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{96}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {075434} (\bibinfo {year} {2017})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Wulf}\ \emph {et~al.}(1988)\citenamefont {Wulf},
\citenamefont {Gudmundsson},\ and\ \citenamefont {Gerhardts}}]{Gerhards88}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {U.}~\bibnamefont
{Wulf}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.}~\bibnamefont {Gudmundsson}}, \
and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.~R.}\ \bibnamefont {Gerhardts}},\
}\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.38.4218} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {38}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {4218} (\bibinfo {year} {1988})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Chklovskii}\ \emph {et~al.}(1992)\citenamefont
{Chklovskii}, \citenamefont {Shklovskii},\ and\ \citenamefont
{Glazman}}]{Shklovskii92}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.~B.}\ \bibnamefont
{Chklovskii}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {B.~I.}\ \bibnamefont
{Shklovskii}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {L.~I.}\ \bibnamefont
{Glazman}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.46.4026} {\bibfield {journal}
{\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {46}},\
\bibinfo {pages} {4026} (\bibinfo {year} {1992})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Cooper}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Chalker}(1993)}]{Chalker93}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {N.~R.}\ \bibnamefont
{Cooper}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~T.}\ \bibnamefont
{Chalker}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.48.4530} {\bibfield {journal}
{\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {48}},\
\bibinfo {pages} {4530} (\bibinfo {year} {1993})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Fogler}\ \emph {et~al.}(1994)\citenamefont {Fogler},
\citenamefont {Levin},\ and\ \citenamefont {Shklovskii}}]{Fogler94}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.~M.}\ \bibnamefont
{Fogler}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {E.~I.}\ \bibnamefont {Levin}}, \
and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {B.~I.}\ \bibnamefont {Shklovskii}},\
}\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.49.13767} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {49}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {13767} (\bibinfo {year} {1994})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Silvestrov}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Efetov}(2008)}]{Efetov}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {P.~G.}\ \bibnamefont
{Silvestrov}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {K.~B.}\ \bibnamefont
{Efetov}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.155436} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{77}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {155436} (\bibinfo {year} {2008})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Cui}\ \emph {et~al.}(2016)\citenamefont {Cui},
\citenamefont {Wen}, \citenamefont {Ma}, \citenamefont {Diankov},
\citenamefont {Han}, \citenamefont {Amet}, \citenamefont {Taniguchi},
\citenamefont {Watanabe}, \citenamefont {Goldhaber-Gordon}, \citenamefont
{Dean},\ and\ \citenamefont {Shen}}]{EdgeSiO2}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {Y.-T.}\ \bibnamefont
{Cui}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {B.}~\bibnamefont {Wen}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {E.~Y.}\ \bibnamefont {Ma}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {G.}~\bibnamefont {Diankov}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{Z.}~\bibnamefont {Han}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {F.}~\bibnamefont
{Amet}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont {Taniguchi}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {K.}~\bibnamefont {Watanabe}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {D.}~\bibnamefont {Goldhaber-Gordon}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {C.~R.}\ \bibnamefont {Dean}}, \ and\ \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {Z.-X.}\ \bibnamefont {Shen}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.186601} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal}
{Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {117}},\ \bibinfo {pages}
{186601} (\bibinfo {year} {2016})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Vera-Marun}\ \emph {et~al.}(2013)\citenamefont
{Vera-Marun}, \citenamefont {Zomer}, \citenamefont {Veligura}, \citenamefont
{Guimarães}, \citenamefont {Visser}, \citenamefont {Tombros}, \citenamefont
{van Elferen}, \citenamefont {Zeitler},\ and\ \citenamefont {van
Wees}}]{IvanEdgePotential}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {I.~J.}\ \bibnamefont
{Vera-Marun}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {P.~J.}\ \bibnamefont
{Zomer}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont {Veligura}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.~H.~D.}\ \bibnamefont {Guimarães}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {L.}~\bibnamefont {Visser}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {N.}~\bibnamefont {Tombros}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {H.~J.}\ \bibnamefont {van Elferen}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {U.}~\bibnamefont {Zeitler}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {B.~J.}\ \bibnamefont {van Wees}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1063/1.4773589} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Applied
Physics Letters}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {102}},\ \bibinfo {pages}
{013106} (\bibinfo {year} {2013})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Ihnatsenka}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Zozoulenko}(2012)}]{StripeHubbard}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Ihnatsenka}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {I.~V.}\ \bibnamefont
{Zozoulenko}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.86.155407} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{86}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {155407} (\bibinfo {year} {2012})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Shylau}\ \emph {et~al.}(2010)\citenamefont {Shylau},
\citenamefont {Zozoulenko}, \citenamefont {Xu},\ and\ \citenamefont
{Heinzel}}]{CompressibleInAStripe}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.~A.}\ \bibnamefont
{Shylau}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {I.~V.}\ \bibnamefont
{Zozoulenko}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {H.}~\bibnamefont {Xu}}, \
and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont {Heinzel}},\ }\href
{\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.82.121410} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {82}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {121410} (\bibinfo {year} {2010})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{Note1()}]{Note1}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibinfo {note} {In contrast to 2DEG created by smooth gate potentials,
graphene has a finite density of states up to the very edge of the flake.
This leads to a sigularity in the charge density near the edge, known to
appear in thin charged metal plates \cite {TextBook}}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Peres}\ \emph {et~al.}(2006)\citenamefont {Peres},
\citenamefont {Guinea},\ and\ \citenamefont {Castro~Neto}}]{EdgeStates1}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {N.~M.~R.}\
\bibnamefont {Peres}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {F.}~\bibnamefont
{Guinea}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.~H.}\ \bibnamefont
{Castro~Neto}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.125411} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{73}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {125411} (\bibinfo {year} {2006})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Abanin}\ \emph {et~al.}(2006)\citenamefont {Abanin},
\citenamefont {Lee},\ and\ \citenamefont {Levitov}}]{EdgeStates2}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.~A.}\ \bibnamefont
{Abanin}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {P.~A.}\ \bibnamefont {Lee}}, \
and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {L.~S.}\ \bibnamefont {Levitov}},\
}\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.176803} {\bibfield {journal}
{\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {96}},\
\bibinfo {pages} {176803} (\bibinfo {year} {2006})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Abanin}}\ \emph {et~al.}(2007)\citenamefont
{{Abanin}}, \citenamefont {{Lee}},\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Levitov}}}]{Abanin2007}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.~A.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Abanin}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {P.~A.}\ \bibnamefont {{Lee}}},
\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {L.~S.}\ \bibnamefont {{Levitov}}},\
}\href {\doibase 10.1016/j.ssc.2007.04.024} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Solid State Commun.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {143}},\
\bibinfo {pages} {77} (\bibinfo {year} {2007})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Brey}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Fertig}(2006)}]{EdgeStates3}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {L.}~\bibnamefont
{Brey}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {H.~A.}\ \bibnamefont
{Fertig}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.195408} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{73}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {195408} (\bibinfo {year} {2006})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Li}}\ \emph {et~al.}(2013)\citenamefont {{Li}},
\citenamefont {{Luican-Mayer}}, \citenamefont {{Abanin}}, \citenamefont
{{Levitov}},\ and\ \citenamefont {{Andrei}}}]{AbaninEdgeWithScreening}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {G.}~\bibnamefont
{{Li}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
{{Luican-Mayer}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.}~\bibnamefont
{{Abanin}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {L.}~\bibnamefont {{Levitov}}},
\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {E.~Y.}\ \bibnamefont {{Andrei}}},\
}\href {\doibase 10.1038/ncomms2767} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Nature Communications}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {4}},\
\bibinfo {eid} {1744} (\bibinfo {year} {2013})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Tetlow}\ \emph {et~al.}(2014)\citenamefont {Tetlow},
\citenamefont {de~Boer}, \citenamefont {Ford}, \citenamefont {Vvedensky},
\citenamefont {Coraux},\ and\ \citenamefont {Kantorovich}}]{EpitaxialGrowth}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {H.}~\bibnamefont
{Tetlow}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~P.}\ \bibnamefont {de~Boer}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {I.}~\bibnamefont {Ford}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {D.}~\bibnamefont {Vvedensky}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {J.}~\bibnamefont {Coraux}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {L.}~\bibnamefont {Kantorovich}},\ }\href {\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2014.03.003} {\bibfield {journal}
{\bibinfo {journal} {Physics Reports}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {542}},\
\bibinfo {pages} {195 } (\bibinfo {year} {2014})},\ \bibinfo {note} {growth
of epitaxial graphene: Theory and experiment}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Bostwick}\ \emph {et~al.}(2009)\citenamefont
{Bostwick}, \citenamefont {McChesney}, \citenamefont {Ohta}, \citenamefont
{Rotenberg}, \citenamefont {Seyller},\ and\ \citenamefont
{Horn}}]{ReviewBOSTWICK}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
{Bostwick}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.}~\bibnamefont {McChesney}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont {Ohta}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {E.}~\bibnamefont {Rotenberg}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont {Seyller}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {K.}~\bibnamefont {Horn}},\ }\href {\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.progsurf.2009.08.002} {\bibfield {journal}
{\bibinfo {journal} {Progress in Surface Science}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo
{volume} {84}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {380 } (\bibinfo {year}
{2009})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Kopylov}\ \emph {et~al.}(2010)\citenamefont
{Kopylov}, \citenamefont {Tzalenchuk}, \citenamefont {Kubatkin},\ and\
\citenamefont {Fal’ko}}]{ChargeTransfer10}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Kopylov}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont {Tzalenchuk}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont {Kubatkin}}, \ and\
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.~I.}\ \bibnamefont {Fal’ko}},\ }\href
{\doibase 10.1063/1.3487782} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal}
{Applied Physics Letters}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {97}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {112109} (\bibinfo {year} {2010})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Tzalenchuk}}\ \emph {et~al.}(2010)\citenamefont
{{Tzalenchuk}}, \citenamefont {{Lara-Avila}}, \citenamefont {{Kalaboukhov}},
\citenamefont {{Paolillo}}, \citenamefont {{Syv{\"a}j{\"a}rvi}},
\citenamefont {{Yakimova}}, \citenamefont {{Kazakova}}, \citenamefont
{{Janssen}}, \citenamefont {{Fal'ko}},\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Kubatkin}}}]{Sasha1}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
{{Tzalenchuk}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{{Lara-Avila}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
{{Kalaboukhov}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{{Paolillo}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.}~\bibnamefont
{{Syv{\"a}j{\"a}rvi}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.}~\bibnamefont
{{Yakimova}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {O.}~\bibnamefont
{{Kazakova}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.~J.~B.~M.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Janssen}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.}~\bibnamefont {{Fal'ko}}},
\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont {{Kubatkin}}},\
}\href {\doibase 10.1038/nnano.2009.474} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Nature Nanotechnology}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {5}},\
\bibinfo {pages} {186} (\bibinfo {year} {2010})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Janssen}\ \emph {et~al.}(2013)\citenamefont
{Janssen}, \citenamefont {Tzalenchuk}, \citenamefont {Lara-Avila},
\citenamefont {Kubatkin},\ and\ \citenamefont {Fal'ko}}]{Sasha2}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.~J. B.~M.}\
\bibnamefont {Janssen}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
{Tzalenchuk}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Lara-Avila}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Kubatkin}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.~I.}\ \bibnamefont
{Fal'ko}},\ }\href {http://stacks.iop.org/0034-4885/76/i=10/a=104501}
{\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Rep. Prog. Phys.}\ }\textbf
{\bibinfo {volume} {76}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {104501} (\bibinfo {year}
{2013})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Janssen}\ \emph {et~al.}(2015)\citenamefont
{Janssen}, \citenamefont {Rozhko}, \citenamefont {Antonov}, \citenamefont
{Tzalenchuk}, \citenamefont {Williams}, \citenamefont {Melhem}, \citenamefont
{He}, \citenamefont {Lara-Avila}, \citenamefont {Kubatkin},\ and\
\citenamefont {Yakimova}}]{Rozhko}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.~J. B.~M.}\
\bibnamefont {Janssen}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Rozhko}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {I.}~\bibnamefont {Antonov}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont {Tzalenchuk}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~M.}\ \bibnamefont {Williams}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {Z.}~\bibnamefont {Melhem}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{H.}~\bibnamefont {He}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Lara-Avila}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Kubatkin}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.}~\bibnamefont
{Yakimova}},\ }\href {http://stacks.iop.org/2053-1583/2/i=3/a=035015}
{\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {2D Materials}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo
{volume} {2}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {035015} (\bibinfo {year}
{2015})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Alexander-Webber}}\ \emph
{et~al.}(2016)\citenamefont {{Alexander-Webber}}, \citenamefont {{Huang}},
\citenamefont {{Maude}}, \citenamefont {{Janssen}}, \citenamefont
{{Tzalenchuk}}, \citenamefont {{Antonov}}, \citenamefont {{Yager}},
\citenamefont {{Lara-Avila}}, \citenamefont {{Kubatkin}}, \citenamefont
{{Yakimova}},\ and\ \citenamefont {{Nicholas}}}]{Sasha3}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~A.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Alexander-Webber}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.}~\bibnamefont
{{Huang}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.~K.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Maude}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.~J.~B.~M.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Janssen}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
{{Tzalenchuk}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.}~\bibnamefont
{{Antonov}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont {{Yager}}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont {{Lara-Avila}}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont {{Kubatkin}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {R.}~\bibnamefont {{Yakimova}}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {R.~J.}\ \bibnamefont {{Nicholas}}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1038/srep30296} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Scientific
Reports}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {6}},\ \bibinfo {eid} {30296} (\bibinfo
{year} {2016})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Janssen}}\ \emph {et~al.}(2011)\citenamefont
{{Janssen}}, \citenamefont {{Tzalenchuk}}, \citenamefont {{Yakimova}},
\citenamefont {{Kubatkin}}, \citenamefont {{Lara-Avila}}, \citenamefont
{{Kopylov}},\ and\ \citenamefont {{Fal'ko}}}]{FalkoPinning}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.~J.~B.~M.}\
\bibnamefont {{Janssen}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
{{Tzalenchuk}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.}~\bibnamefont
{{Yakimova}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{{Kubatkin}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{{Lara-Avila}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{{Kopylov}}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.~I.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Fal'ko}}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.233402} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {\prb}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {83}},\
\bibinfo {eid} {233402} (\bibinfo {year} {2011})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Woszczyna}\ \emph {et~al.}(2012)\citenamefont
{Woszczyna}, \citenamefont {Friedemann}, \citenamefont {Götz}, \citenamefont
{Pesel}, \citenamefont {Pierz}, \citenamefont {Weimann},\ and\ \citenamefont
{Ahlers}}]{TransferredGrapheneQHE}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.}~\bibnamefont
{Woszczyna}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.}~\bibnamefont
{Friedemann}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.}~\bibnamefont {Götz}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {E.}~\bibnamefont {Pesel}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {K.}~\bibnamefont {Pierz}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont {Weimann}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {F.~J.}\ \bibnamefont {Ahlers}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1063/1.4704190} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Appl. Phys.
Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {100}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {164106}
(\bibinfo {year} {2012})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Lafont}}\ \emph {et~al.}(2015)\citenamefont
{{Lafont}}, \citenamefont {{Ribeiro-Palau}}, \citenamefont {{Kazazis}},
\citenamefont {{Michon}}, \citenamefont {{Couturaud}}, \citenamefont
{{Consejo}}, \citenamefont {{Chassagne}}, \citenamefont {{Zielinski}},
\citenamefont {{Portail}}, \citenamefont {{Jouault}}, \citenamefont
{{Schopfer}},\ and\ \citenamefont {{Poirier}}}]{CWDGrapheneQHE}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {F.}~\bibnamefont
{{Lafont}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.}~\bibnamefont
{{Ribeiro-Palau}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.}~\bibnamefont
{{Kazazis}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont {{Michon}}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {O.}~\bibnamefont {{Couturaud}}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {C.}~\bibnamefont {{Consejo}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont {{Chassagne}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {M.}~\bibnamefont {{Zielinski}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {M.}~\bibnamefont {{Portail}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {B.}~\bibnamefont {{Jouault}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {F.}~\bibnamefont {{Schopfer}}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {W.}~\bibnamefont {{Poirier}}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1038/ncomms7806} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Nature
Communications}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {6}},\ \bibinfo {eid} {6806}
(\bibinfo {year} {2015})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Yang}\ \emph {et~al.}(2016)\citenamefont {Yang},
\citenamefont {Couturaud}, \citenamefont {Desrat}, \citenamefont {Consejo},
\citenamefont {Kazazis}, \citenamefont {Yakimova}, \citenamefont
{Syv\"aj\"arvi}, \citenamefont {Goiran}, \citenamefont {B\'eard},
\citenamefont {Frings}, \citenamefont {Pierre}, \citenamefont {Cresti},
\citenamefont {Escoffier},\ and\ \citenamefont {Jouault}}]{LongPlateau16}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.}~\bibnamefont
{Yang}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {O.}~\bibnamefont {Couturaud}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {W.}~\bibnamefont {Desrat}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {C.}~\bibnamefont {Consejo}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {D.}~\bibnamefont {Kazazis}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{R.}~\bibnamefont {Yakimova}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{M.}~\bibnamefont {Syv\"aj\"arvi}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{M.}~\bibnamefont {Goiran}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{J.}~\bibnamefont {B\'eard}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{P.}~\bibnamefont {Frings}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{M.}~\bibnamefont {Pierre}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{A.}~\bibnamefont {Cresti}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{W.}~\bibnamefont {Escoffier}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont
{B.}~\bibnamefont {Jouault}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.237702} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal}
{Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {117}},\ \bibinfo {pages}
{237702} (\bibinfo {year} {2016})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Shen}\ \emph {et~al.}(2011)\citenamefont {Shen},
\citenamefont {Wu}, \citenamefont {Yu}, \citenamefont {Richter},
\citenamefont {Elmquist}, \citenamefont {Newell},\ and\ \citenamefont
{Chen}}]{CWDTransferred}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont
{Shen}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {W.}~\bibnamefont {Wu}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {Q.}~\bibnamefont {Yu}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {C.~A.}\ \bibnamefont {Richter}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {R.}~\bibnamefont {Elmquist}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {D.}~\bibnamefont {Newell}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {Y.~P.}\ \bibnamefont {Chen}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1063/1.3663972} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Appl. Phys.
Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {99}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {232110}
(\bibinfo {year} {2011})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Parmentier}}\ \emph {et~al.}(2016)\citenamefont
{{Parmentier}}, \citenamefont {{Cazimajou}}, \citenamefont {{Sekine}},
\citenamefont {{Hibino}}, \citenamefont {{Irie}}, \citenamefont {{Glattli}},
\citenamefont {{Kumada}},\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Roulleau}}}]{QHEEpitaxialLowField}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {F.~D.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Parmentier}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont
{{Cazimajou}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {Y.}~\bibnamefont
{{Sekine}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {H.}~\bibnamefont {{Hibino}}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {H.}~\bibnamefont {{Irie}}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {D.~C.}\ \bibnamefont {{Glattli}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {N.}~\bibnamefont {{Kumada}}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {P.}~\bibnamefont {{Roulleau}}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1038/srep38393} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Scientific
Reports}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {6}},\ \bibinfo {eid} {38393} (\bibinfo
{year} {2016})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Lara-Avila}\ \emph {et~al.}(2011)\citenamefont
{Lara-Avila}, \citenamefont {Moth-Poulsen}, \citenamefont {Yakimova},
\citenamefont {Bjørnholm}, \citenamefont {Fal’ko}, \citenamefont
{Tzalenchuk},\ and\ \citenamefont {Kubatkin}}]{ChemicalGating}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Lara-Avila}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {K.}~\bibnamefont
{Moth-Poulsen}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {R.}~\bibnamefont
{Yakimova}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont
{Bjørnholm}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.}~\bibnamefont
{Fal’ko}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.}~\bibnamefont
{Tzalenchuk}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {S.}~\bibnamefont
{Kubatkin}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1002/adma.201003993} {\bibfield {journal}
{\bibinfo {journal} {Adv. Mater.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {23}},\
\bibinfo {pages} {878} (\bibinfo {year} {2011})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Johnson}}(1962)}]{TextBook}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~D.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Johnson}}},\ }\href@noop {} {\emph {\bibinfo {title} {{Classical
electrodynamics}}}}\ (\bibinfo {publisher} {John Wiley \& Sons, Inc.},\
\bibinfo {year} {1962})\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Khaetskii}}\ \emph {et~al.}(1994)\citenamefont
{{Khaetskii}}, \citenamefont {{Fal'ko}},\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Bauer}}}]{KhaetskiiFalko}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.~V.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Khaetskii}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.~I.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Fal'ko}}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {G.~E.~W.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Bauer}}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.50.4571} {\bibfield {journal}
{\bibinfo {journal} {\prb}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {50}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {4571} (\bibinfo {year} {1994})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Lavrentiev}}\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Shabat}}(1974)}]{Lavrentiev}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {M.~A.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Lavrentiev}}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {B.~V.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Shabat}}},\ }\href@noop {} {\emph {\bibinfo {title} {{Metodi teorii funkcii
kompleksnogo peremennogo (Methods of theory of complex variable)}}}}\
(\bibinfo {publisher} {Moscow, Nauka},\ \bibinfo {year} {1974})\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{Note2()}]{Note2}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibinfo {note} {The function $U(y)$ is interpolated with $\sim 50 $ points
and iterations are done as $U_{new} = \alpha U(U_{old}) + (1- \alpha )
U_{old}$ with a factor $\alpha \leq 1 $ small enough to reach convergence. At
small $\Delta $ the non-linearity gets strong and we need to choose rather
small values $\alpha \sim 0.001$ to achieve convergence.}\BibitemShut {Stop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Cheianov}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Fal'ko}(2006)}]{WhisperingGallery0}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.~V.}\ \bibnamefont
{Cheianov}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.~I.}\ \bibnamefont
{Fal'ko}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.74.041403} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{74}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {041403} (\bibinfo {year} {2006})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{Zhao}}\ \emph {et~al.}(2015)\citenamefont {{Zhao}},
\citenamefont {{Wyrick}}, \citenamefont {{Natterer}}, \citenamefont
{{Rodriguez-Nieva}}, \citenamefont {{Lewandowski}}, \citenamefont
{{Watanabe}}, \citenamefont {{Taniguchi}}, \citenamefont {{Levitov}},
\citenamefont {{Zhitenev}},\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Stroscio}}}]{WhisperingGallery}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {Y.}~\bibnamefont
{{Zhao}}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.}~\bibnamefont {{Wyrick}}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {F.~D.}\ \bibnamefont {{Natterer}}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~F.}\ \bibnamefont {{Rodriguez-Nieva}}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {C.}~\bibnamefont {{Lewandowski}}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {K.}~\bibnamefont {{Watanabe}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont {{Taniguchi}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {L.~S.}\ \bibnamefont {{Levitov}}}, \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {N.~B.}\ \bibnamefont {{Zhitenev}}}, \ and\ \bibinfo {author}
{\bibfnamefont {J.~A.}\ \bibnamefont {{Stroscio}}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1126/science.aaa7469} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal}
{Science}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {348}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {672}
(\bibinfo {year} {2015})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{Note3()}]{Note3}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibinfo {note} {The boundary conditions can be used to incorporate the
sample-dependent variations of potential near the edge of graphene, which
arise due to chemical and electrostatic modification of the edge. To consider
the effect of a large potential $U(y)$ near the edge, let us start solving
the Dirac equation from a point $y_0>0$, hence, we need a new boundary
condition, $\phi (y_0)$. We find that Eq. (\ref {DiracGen}) leads to $$
\protect \frac {d}{d y} \phi (y) = 2 \protect \frac {U(y)-E }{\hbar v} + 2
\(p+\protect \frac {y}{l_B^2}\) \pm \protect \qopname \relax o{sin}\phi (y),
$$ producing a flow of boundary conditions for valleys $\pm K$ (we do not
loose solutions in this procedure if the second, nonlinear, term can be
neglected relative to the first term). This flow depends on valley, $p$ and
$E$, producing a more general class of $E$-- and $p$-- dependent boundary
conditions. Considering the flow in the region of large $|U|$ ($|E| \ll
|U(y)| $ for $y<y_0$), and concentrating on low $|p|$, leads to an
approximate equation $\protect \frac {d}{d y} \phi (y) \approx 2 \protect
\frac {U(y)}{\hbar v} $. It means that when $U(y)$ is positive (negative)
near the edge, the effective boundary parameter increases (decreases) as we
move away from the edge. As a result, the sample-dependent details of the
potential near the edge can be absorbed into a renormalization of $\phi $.
For example, the standard zigzag boundary conditions, $\phi (0)=0$, behave
similarly to $\phi \approx \pi /4$ in G/SiC at $\nu =2$. Note that at large
and wide potential near the edge (as happens for $\nu =-2$ in our
discussion), moving $y_0$ to the safe region of low potential will involve
$\phi $ making several $2 \pi $ turns, resulting in the loss of several
solutions, corresponding to extra evanescent modes\cite
{WhisperingGallery0,WhisperingGallery}}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Akhmerov}\ and\ \citenamefont
{Beenakker}(2008)}]{Akhmerov1}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {A.~R.}\ \bibnamefont
{Akhmerov}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {C.~W.~J.}\ \bibnamefont
{Beenakker}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.085423} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {Phys. Rev. B}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume}
{77}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {085423} (\bibinfo {year} {2008})}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {{McCann}}\ and\ \citenamefont
{{Fal'ko}}(2004)}]{FalkoBoundary}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {E.}~\bibnamefont
{{McCann}}}\ and\ \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {V.~I.}\ \bibnamefont
{{Fal'ko}}},\ }\href {\doibase 10.1088/0953-8984/16/13/016} {\bibfield
{journal} {\bibinfo {journal} {J. Phys., Condens. Mat.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo
{volume} {16}},\ \bibinfo {pages} {2371} (\bibinfo {year}
{2004})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{Note4()}]{Note4}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibinfo {note} {This equation is easily derived from the plain capacitor
geometry and the requirement $\mu = \protect \frac {\hbar v}{l_B} \protect
\frac {1}{\protect \sqrt {2}}$, $\rho =2 e /(2 \pi l_B^2) $}\BibitemShut
{NoStop}%
\bibitem [{Note5()}]{Note5}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibinfo {note} {To estimate ${\protect \cal L}$ we use Eq. (\ref
{ChargeTransfer2plate}). The dependence ${\protect \cal L}\propto d$ follows
from the scaling $\protect \EuScript {E}_z(y ; d) = \protect \mathaccentV
{tilde}07E{\protect \EuScript {E}}_z (y/d)/d$ and $\rho (y; d) = \protect
\mathaccentV {tilde}07E\rho (y/d)/d$ in Eq. (\ref {rhoEq}).}\BibitemShut
{Stop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Abanin}\ \emph {et~al.}(2007)\citenamefont {Abanin},
\citenamefont {Novoselov}, \citenamefont {Zeitler}, \citenamefont {Lee},
\citenamefont {Geim},\ and\ \citenamefont {Levitov}}]{DissipativeHall07}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {D.~A.}\ \bibnamefont
{Abanin}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {K.~S.}\ \bibnamefont
{Novoselov}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {U.}~\bibnamefont {Zeitler}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {P.~A.}\ \bibnamefont {Lee}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {A.~K.}\ \bibnamefont {Geim}}, \ and\ \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {L.~S.}\ \bibnamefont {Levitov}},\ }\href {\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.196806} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo {journal}
{Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {98}},\ \bibinfo {pages}
{196806} (\bibinfo {year} {2007})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\bibitem [{\citenamefont {Amet}\ \emph {et~al.}(2014)\citenamefont {Amet},
\citenamefont {Williams}, \citenamefont {Watanabe}, \citenamefont
{Taniguchi},\ and\ \citenamefont {Goldhaber-Gordon}}]{EdgeEquilibration14}%
\BibitemOpen
\bibfield {author} {\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {F.}~\bibnamefont
{Amet}}, \bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {J.~R.}\ \bibnamefont {Williams}},
\bibinfo {author} {\bibfnamefont {K.}~\bibnamefont {Watanabe}}, \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {T.}~\bibnamefont {Taniguchi}}, \ and\ \bibinfo
{author} {\bibfnamefont {D.}~\bibnamefont {Goldhaber-Gordon}},\ }\href
{\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.196601} {\bibfield {journal} {\bibinfo
{journal} {Phys. Rev. Lett.}\ }\textbf {\bibinfo {volume} {112}},\ \bibinfo
{pages} {196601} (\bibinfo {year} {2014})}\BibitemShut {NoStop}%
\end{thebibliography}%
\end{document}