Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Dynamics of the Schmid-Higgs Mode in $d$-wave superconductors

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that after a weak quench, the amplitude (Schmid-Higgs) mode of a d-wave superconductor oscillates at a frequency set by the anti-nodal gap, 2√2Δ0, and its amplitude decays as 1/t^2.

desk verdict A solid, internally consistent model calculation of the d-wave Higgs mode frequency and 1/t^2 decay, but the decay law is read off numerics and the key approximation is acknowledged as uncertain. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.03790 v1 pith:FS5EEKEI submitted 2025-11-05 cond-mat.supr-con

Samuel Awelewa , Maxim Dzero This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-con PACS 67.85.De34.90.+q74.40.Gh
keywords Schmid-Higgsmoded-wavesuperconductoramplitudepairingsusceptibilityAndersonpseudospinsquenchdynamicsanti-nodalgapEilenbergerequation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper aims to pin down the frequency and decay law of the longitudinal amplitude (Schmid-Higgs) mode in a d-wave superconductor after a weak sudden perturbation. Using the quasiclassical Eilenberger formalism, the authors compute the zero-momentum pairing susceptibility and find that the mode oscillates at 2√2Δ0, i.e., twice the pairing amplitude along the anti-nodal direction, and that the oscillation amplitude falls off as 1/t^2. They confirm this by direct numerical solution of the Anderson pseudospin equations of motion. If correct, the result distinguishes d-wave superconductors from conventional s-wave ones, where the mode frequency is 2Δ0 and the decay is 1/√t, and gives a concrete target for time-resolved experiments.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on two equivalent descriptions of the same mean-field dynamics: the Eilenberger equation for the quasiclassical propagator (used to derive the Schmid-Higgs pair susceptibility χ_SH(Ω) from the self-consistency condition), and the classical equations of motion for Anderson pseudospins S_k, which are solved numerically for a weak quench. The load-bearing identity is the relation between the mode frequency and the anti-nodal gap, ω_SH = √2 Δ0 = Δ_an, which follows from the angular averages over the normalized d-wave form factor γ_n.

What would settle it

Measure the time-dependent order parameter (e.g., by time-resolved ARPES or THz pump-probe) in a clean d-wave superconductor after a weak pump: if the dominant oscillation frequency is not 2√2 Δ0 or the envelope decays faster than a power law (exponentially), the central claim is wrong. Alternatively, include the off-diagonal pairing terms in a numerical solution of the pseudospin or time-dependent BCS equations; if the 1/t^2 tail disappears, the simplification is not justified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that after a weak quench the order parameter of a d-wave superconductor evolves as Δ(t) ≈ Δ0 [1 + A cos(2ω_SH t + π/4)/(tΔ0)^2] with ω_SH = √2 Δ0 ≡ Δ_an, the anti-nodal gap. The same frequency, 2√2Δ0, and the same 1/t^2 decay are found in the pairing susceptibility computed from the Eilenberger equation. The authors interpret the factor √2 as a consequence of using the normalized d-wave form factor γ_n = √2(n_x^2 - n_y^2); with the unnormalized cos2φ form factor, previous work obtained a different mode energy.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that Cooper-pair scattering between different Fermi-surface directions (off-diagonal-in-momentum pairing terms) can be neglected at zero momentum; if nodal quasiparticles couple to the amplitude mode at q=0, the 1/t^2 law is replaced by exponential decay.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In a d-wave superconductor, the amplitude mode frequency is 2√2 Δ0 (2Δ_an), not 2Δ0 as in s-wave superconductors.
  • The oscillation amplitude decays as 1/t^2 at long times, much faster than the 1/√t law of the s-wave case.
  • The peak in the imaginary part of the Schmid-Higgs susceptibility is broad and sits above 2Δ0, so the mode is not a sharp resonance in d-wave systems.
  • Time-resolved pump-probe experiments on clean d-wave materials (e.g., cuprates) should see an oscillatory component at 2√2 Δ0 with a 1/t^2 envelope.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper's own caveat: the mean-field Hamiltonian drops off-diagonal-in-momentum pairing terms. At finite momentum, or when nodal quasiparticle scattering is included, the 1/t^2 tail may give way to exponential decay, which would make the mode much harder to observe; the paper's regime of validity is q=0 and the collisionless limit.
  • The discrepancy with earlier works is attributed to the normalization of the d-wave form factor. An independent re-derivation using the unnormalized form factor could verify this explanation and settle the numerical value of the mode frequency.
  • The same susceptibility machinery could be applied at finite momentum q; the paper notes that nodal vs anti-nodal directions may behave differently, so a spatially resolved calculation could reveal anisotropic decay of the mode.
  • For experiments, the prediction suggests that the observable oscillation window is short (since 1/t^2 decays quickly), so ultra-short-pulse setups would be needed to see the mode.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the longitudinal Schmid-Higgs mode in a d-wave superconductor after a weak quench of the pairing interaction. The authors use a quasiclassical Eilenberger/Keldysh approach to derive the zero-momentum pairing susceptibility and find, via numerical Fourier transform, that the mode oscillates at frequency 2√2 Δ0 (twice the anti-nodal gap) and decays as ~1/t^2. They then independently simulate the Anderson pseudospin dynamics and extract the same frequency and decay law, summarized in Eq. (47)–(48). The central quantitative claim is Δ(t) ≈ Δ0[1 + A cos(2ω_SH t + π/4)/(tΔ0)^2] with ω_SH = √2 Δ0. The model Hamiltonian (1) deliberately neglects off-diagonal-in-momentum pairing terms, an approximation the authors acknowledge may be problematic for nodal d-wave superconductors.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a concrete and non-trivial prediction: in a clean d-wave superconductor the Schmid-Higgs mode frequency is set by the anti-nodal gap and its amplitude decays as 1/t^2, distinctly faster than the 1/√t law in s-wave superconductors. The use of two independent computational routes—quasiclassical susceptibility and classical pseudospin dynamics—is a strength: their mutual agreement checks internal consistency of the formalism. The authors also explicitly discuss the key approximation and its potential limitations, which is commendable. However, the central prediction is conditional on the validity of neglecting off-diagonal pairing terms at q=0, and the 1/t^2 exponent is extracted from numerical fits rather than derived analytically. These caveats limit the strength of the claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II, Hamiltonian (1), and Sec. V] The neglect of off-diagonal-in-momentum pairing terms is load-bearing. The authors themselves state in Sec. II that nodal quasiparticles would be expected to make the Schmid-Higgs mode decay exponentially, and the justification in Sec. V ('which is justified as long as we are interested in the dynamics at q=0') is an assertion, not a derivation. The q=0 limit does not remove the nodal quasiparticle continuum, nor does it obviously suppress scattering between different Fermi-surface directions. Both calculations use the same truncated Hamiltonian, so their agreement does not test this assumption. Please either provide a controlled estimate of the off-diagonal terms at q=0 (e.g., a diagrammatic or RG argument, or a numerical test with a more complete kernel) or explicitly weaken the central claim to apply only within the truncated model.
  2. [Sec. III, Fig. 2, and Eq. (47)] The asymptotic decay exponent α≈2 is determined solely from numerical fits ('From our numerical analysis it follows...'), with no error bars, no fit residuals, and no analytic asymptotic derivation from χ_SH(Ω). Given that the 1/t^2 law is a central claim, it should be backed by an analytic asymptotic analysis near the relevant threshold (e.g., saddle-point or van Hove analysis of the angular integral) rather than read off a log–log fit. Please provide the analytic exponent, or at minimum a quantitative fitting procedure with confidence intervals and a demonstration that the result is robust to the fit window.
  3. [Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, Eq. (38)] The frequency 2√2 Δ0 is extracted numerically (peak in Im χ_SH and FFT) without identifying the analytic origin. The susceptibility expression (38) is a two-dimensional integral; the peak frequency and the oscillation frequency should be tied to a specific singularity or stationary-phase contribution. Without such an identification, the claim that the frequency is 'determined by the anti-nodal gap' remains a numerical observation. It would strengthen the paper to show analytically where 2√2 Δ0 emerges from the angular average of γ_n^2 in Eq. (38).
minor comments (5)
  1. [General] Typos: 'staisfies' in Eq. (2) line; 'the the' in the first introductory paragraph; 'paring' should be 'pairing' in Sec. IV or figure captions. Please proofread.
  2. [Eq. (36)] The notation Y(n) appears in Eq. (36) before it is explained; later text says 'after setting Y(n)=1' but does not define Y(n) for the d-wave case. Presumably Y(n)=γ_n, but this should be stated explicitly.
  3. [Sec. V] The discussion of finite-momentum dynamics is speculative and leans on Ref. [71], which is unpublished. Either provide some preliminary results or mark the statement as an outlook without citing an unavailable work as support.
  4. [Fig. 3] The inset axis labels ('60 80 100 t Δ0') are unclear; please format as tΔ0 with a clear axis. The main panel x-axis should also specify units (tΔ0).
  5. [Introduction, Refs. [44,47]] The claim that the difference from Refs. [44,47] stems from the normalized versus unnormalized form factor would be more convincing if a brief numerical check or a comment on the angular average were included. As written it is a plausible but unverified attribution.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the d-wave Schmid-Higgs frequency and 1/t^2 decay are computed from the stated model; internal cross-checks do not reduce to inputs.

full rationale

The paper’s claimed results—the susceptibility peak at ~2√2Δ0 and the long-time 1/t^2 decay—are obtained by analytic and numerical evaluation of the model defined in Eq. (1). The inverse susceptibility χ_SH^{-1}(Ω) in Eq. (38) is derived from the Eilenberger equation plus the self-consistency condition; the mode frequency is then read off from the numerically evaluated susceptibility (Figs. 1–2). The Anderson-pseudospin dynamics uses the same Hamiltonian and independently yields the fit Eq. (47). This is internal consistency, not circularity: neither the frequency nor the decay exponent is inserted as an input, and the two routes agree because they share the same underlying model. The paper also recovers the known s-wave susceptibility when Y(n)=1, providing an external benchmark. Self-citations (Refs. 56–57) are used only for an analogy to pair-broken s-wave superconductors and are explicitly hedged with “We believe,” so they are not load-bearing. The acknowledged neglect of off-diagonal-in-momentum pairing terms (Sec. II: “it is not a priori clear if this approximation is justified here...”; Sec. V: “kept only diagonal in momentum terms... justified as long as we are interested in the dynamics at q=0”) is a genuine physical limitation and a correctness risk, as the authors themselves note that nodal quasiparticles might cause exponential decay, but it is an assumption about the model, not a circular step in the derivation. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction; the identification Δ_an = √2Δ0 is a definition, while the nontrivial content is the computed coefficient 2√2 in the observable oscillation frequency.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculation is a parameter-free linear-response derivation for a standard BCS model with a normalized d-wave form factor, but it depends on the clean, q=0, diagonal-pairing assumption and reads its main power-law result from numerical fits.

free parameters (3)
  • Asymptotic decay exponent α = ≈2
    Extracted by fitting the long-time tails in Figs. 2 and 3 (inset) rather than derived analytically from Eq. (38); the paper reports this as 1/t^2.
  • Quench amplitude δλ/λ = 0.05
    Chosen small in the pseudospin simulation to remain in the linear regime (Fig. 3); not scanned, so independence of the result is assumed.
  • Oscillation amplitude A in Eq. (47) = ≪1
    Fit amplitude of the long-time oscillation; not predicted from the susceptibility derivation.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Mean-field BCS Hamiltonian with only diagonal-in-momentum d-wave pairing (Eq. 1)
    Authors state off-diagonal terms are neglected and acknowledge this is not a priori justified for nodal d-wave; they assume it holds for q=0 dynamics.
  • domain assumption Quasiclassical/Eilenberger approximation in the clean limit (Eq. 4)
    Standard for superconducting dynamics; requires p≈p_F and slow spatial variation; used throughout Section II.
  • domain assumption Linear response regime: weak perturbation and second-order corrections (Section II.C)
    The susceptibility is obtained by keeping corrections through second order in the vector potential; limits validity to small quenches.
  • domain assumption Form factor normalization ∫|γ|^2 dφ/(2π)=1 (Eq. 2)
    The reported frequency 2√2Δ0 and the claimed disagreement with Refs. 44,47 depend on this normalization; physical results should be invariant under rescaling if λ is adjusted, so this convention carries weight.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamics of the Schmid-Higgs Mode in $d$-wave superconductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FS5EEKEI

@misc{pith2026251103790,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamics of the Schmid-Higgs Mode in $d$-wave superconductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FS5EEKEI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.03790}
}
abstract

We study the dynamics of the longitudinal collective mode in an unconventional superconductor. For concreteness, we assume that the superconductor is described by a $d$-wave order parameter with $d_{x^2-y^2}$ symmetry. After the superconductor has been suddenly subjected to a perturbation at time $t=0$, the order parameter exhibits a peculiar oscillatory behavior, with the amplitude of the oscillations slowly decaying with time in a power-law fashion. Assuming that the initial perturbation is weak, we use a formalism based on quasi-classical approach to superconductivity to determine both the frequency of the oscillations as well as how fast these oscillations decay with time by evaluating the time dependence of the pairing susceptibility. We find that the frequency of the oscillations is given by twice the value of the pairing amplitude in the anti-nodal direction and its amplitude decays as $1/t^2$. The results are also verified by a direct calculation of the order parameter dynamics by numerically solving the equations of motion for the Anderson pseudospins.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.03790 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Comparison between the real and imaginary parts of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Time dependence of the Schmid-Higgs susceptibility com [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Main panel: time dependence of the pairing amplitude fol [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Spatially resolved collective modes in d-wave superconductors

    cond-mat.supr-con 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In d-wave superconductors, the amplitude mode's peak frequency depends on momentum direction but its 1/t² decay does not; the phase mode softens at finite temperature due to nodal quasiparticles.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    V. L. Ginzburg and L. D. Landau, On the Theory of Superconductivity , pp. 113--137. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009

    2009

  2. [2]

    Bardeen, L

    J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, ``Theory of superconductivity,'' Phys. Rev. , vol. 108, p. 1175, 1957

    1957

  3. [3]

    P. W. Anderson, ``Random-phase approximation in the theory of superconductivity,'' Phys. Rev. , vol. 112, p. 1900, 1958

    1900

  4. [4]

    Pekker and C

    D. Pekker and C. Varma, ``Amplitude/Higgs modes in condensed matter physics,'' Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics , vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 269--297, 2015

    2015

  5. [5]

    R. V. Carlson and A. M. Goldman, ``Superconducting order-parameter fluctuations below T _ c ,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 31, pp. 880--883, Oct 1973

    1973

  6. [6]

    I. O. Kulik, O. Entin-Wohlman, and R. Orbach, ``Pair susceptibility and mode propagation in superconductors: A microscopic approach,'' Journal of Low Temperature Physics , vol. 43, pp. 591--620, Jun 1981

    1981

  7. [7]

    Schmid, ``The approach to equilibrium in a pure superconductor the relaxation of the cooper pair density,'' Physik der kondensierten Materie , vol

    A. Schmid, ``The approach to equilibrium in a pure superconductor the relaxation of the cooper pair density,'' Physik der kondensierten Materie , vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 129--140, 1968

    1968

  8. [8]

    V. P. Galaiko, ``Kinetic equation for relaxation processes in superconductors,'' Sov. Phys. JETP , vol. 34, p. 203, 1972

    1972

Show all 71 references
  1. [9]

    A. F. Volkov and S. M. Kogan, ``Collisionless relaxation of the energy gap in superconductors,'' Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz , vol. 65, p. 2038, 1974. English translation: Sov. Phys. JETP, 38 , 1018 (1974)

  2. [10]

    Y. M. Galperin, V. I. Kozub, and B. Z. Spivak, ``Dissipationless BCS dynamics with large branch imbalance,'' Sov. Phys. JETP , vol. 54, p. 1126, 1981

    1981

  3. [11]

    P. B. Littlewood and C. M. Varma, ``Gauge-invariant theory of the dynamical interaction of charge density waves and superconductivity,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 47, pp. 811--814, Sep 1981

    1981

  4. [12]

    P. B. Littlewood and C. M. Varma, ``Amplitude collective modes in superconductors and their coupling to charge-density waves,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 26, pp. 4883--4893, Nov 1982

    1982

  5. [13]

    Matsunaga and R

    R. Matsunaga and R. Shimano, ``Nonequilibrium bcs state dynamics induced by intense terahertz pulses in a superconducting NbN film,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 109, p. 187002, Oct 2012

    2012

  6. [14]

    Matsunaga, Y

    R. Matsunaga, Y. I. Hamada, K. Makise, Y. Uzawa, H. Terai, Z. Wang, and R. Shimano, ``Higgs amplitude mode in the BCS superconductors Nb _ 1 - x Ti _ x N induced by terahertz pulse excitation,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 111, p. 057002, Jul 2013

    2013

  7. [15]

    Matsunaga, N

    R. Matsunaga, N. Tsuji, H. Fujita, A. Sugioka, K. Makise, Y. Uzawa, H. Terai, Z. Wang, H. Aoki, and R. Shimano, ``Light-induced collective pseudospin precession resonating with Higgs mode in a superconductor,'' Science , vol. 345, no. 6201, pp. 1145--1149, 2014

    2014

  8. [16]

    M. Beck, I. Rousseau, M. Klammer, P. Leiderer, M. Mittendorff, S. Winnerl, M. Helm, G. N. Gol'tsman, and J. Demsar, ``Transient increase of the energy gap of superconducting NbN thin films excited by resonant narrow-band terahertz pulses,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 110, p. 2670...

    2013

  9. [17]

    Sherman, U

    D. Sherman, U. S. Pracht, B. Gorshunov, S. Poran, J. Jesudasan, M. Chand, P. Raychaudhuri, M. Swanson, N. Trivedi, A. Auerbach, M. Scheffler, A. Frydman, and M. Dressel, ``The Higgs mode in disordered superconductors close to a quantum phase transition,'' Nature Physics , vol....

    2015

  10. [18]

    Katsumi, J

    K. Katsumi, J. Fiore, M. Udina, R. Romero, D. Barbalas, J. Jesudasan, P. Raychaudhuri, G. Seibold, L. Benfatto, and N. P. Armitage, ``Revealing novel aspects of light-matter coupling by terahertz two-dimensional coherent spectroscopy: The case of the amplitude mode in supercon...

    2024

  11. [19]

    M\'easson, Y

    M.-A. M\'easson, Y. Gallais, M. Cazayous, B. Clair, P. Rodi\`ere, L. Cario, and A. Sacuto, ``Amplitude higgs mode in the 2H - NbSe _ 2 superconductor,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 89, p. 060503, Feb 2014

    2014

  12. [20]

    Behrle, T

    A. Behrle, T. Harrison, J. Kombe, K. Gao, M. Link, J. S. Bernier, C. Kollath, and M. K \"o hl, ``Higgs mode in a strongly interacting fermionic superfluid,'' Nature Physics , vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 781--785, 2018

    2018

  13. [21]

    Grasset, Y

    R. Grasset, Y. Gallais, A. Sacuto, M. Cazayous, S. Ma\ nas Valero, E. Coronado, and M.-A. M\'easson, ``Pressure-induced collapse of the charge density wave and Higgs mode visibility in 2H - TaS _ 2 ,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 122, p. 127001, Mar 2019

    2019

  14. [22]

    Shimano and N

    R. Shimano and N. Tsuji, ``Higgs mode in superconductors,'' Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics , vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 103--124, 2020

    2020

  15. [23]

    Nakamura, K

    S. Nakamura, K. Katsumi, H. Terai, and R. Shimano, ``Nonreciprocal terahertz second-harmonic generation in superconducting NbN under supercurrent injection,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 125, p. 097004, Aug 2020

    2020

  16. [24]

    Papenkort, V

    T. Papenkort, V. M. Axt, and T. Kuhn, ``Coherent dynamics and pump-probe spectra of BCS superconductors,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 76, p. 224522, Dec 2007

    2007

  17. [25]

    Papenkort, T

    T. Papenkort, T. Kuhn, and V. M. Axt, ``Nonequilibrium dynamics and coherent control of BCS superconductors driven by ultrashort THz pulses,'' Journal of Physics , vol. 193, p. 012050, 2009

    2009

  18. [26]

    Podolsky, A

    D. Podolsky, A. Auerbach, and D. P. Arovas, ``Visibility of the amplitude (Higgs) mode in condensed matter,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 84, p. 174522, Nov 2011

    2011

  19. [27]

    Podolsky and S

    D. Podolsky and S. Sachdev, ``Spectral functions of the Higgs mode near two-dimensional quantum critical points,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 86, p. 054508, Aug 2012

    2012

  20. [28]

    Gazit, D

    S. Gazit, D. Podolsky, and A. Auerbach, ``Fate of the Higgs mode near quantum criticality,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 110, p. 140401, Apr 2013

    2013

  21. [29]

    Ran c c on and N

    A. Ran c c on and N. Dupuis, ``Higgs amplitude mode in the vicinity of a (2+1) -dimensional quantum critical point,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 89, p. 180501, May 2014

    2014

  22. [30]

    Krull, D

    H. Krull, D. Manske, G. S. Uhrig, and A. P. Schnyder, ``Signatures of nonadiabatic BCS state dynamics in pump-probe conductivity,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 90, p. 014515, Jul 2014

    2014

  23. [31]

    T. Cea, C. Castellani, and L. Benfatto, ``Nonlinear optical effects and third-harmonic generation in superconductors: Cooper pairs versus Higgs mode contribution,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 93, p. 180507, May 2016

    2016

  24. [32]

    A. Moor, A. F. Volkov, and K. B. Efetov, ``Amplitude higgs mode and admittance in superconductors with a moving condensate,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 118, p. 047001, Jan 2017

    2017

  25. [33]

    Silaev, ``Nonlinear electromagnetic response and higgs-mode excitation in bcs superconductors with impurities,'' Phys

    M. Silaev, ``Nonlinear electromagnetic response and higgs-mode excitation in bcs superconductors with impurities,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 99, p. 224511, Jun 2019

    2019

  26. [34]

    Fischer, M

    S. Fischer, M. Hecker, M. Hoyer, and J. Schmalian, ``Short-distance breakdown of the Higgs mechanism and the robustness of the BCS theory for charged superconductors,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 97, p. 054510, Feb 2018

    2018

  27. [35]

    Z. Sun, M. M. Fogler, D. N. Basov, and A. J. Millis, ``Collective modes and terahertz near-field response of superconductors,'' Phys. Rev. Res. , vol. 2, p. 023413, Jun 2020

    2020

  28. [36]

    Derendorf, A

    P. Derendorf, A. F. Volkov, and I. M. Eremin, ``Nonlinear response of diffusive superconductors to ac electromagnetic fields,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 109, p. 024510, Jan 2024

    2024

  29. [37]

    H. P. O. Collado, N. Defenu, and J. Lorenzana, ``Engineering Higgs dynamics by spectral singularities,'' Phys. Rev. Res. , vol. 5, p. 023011, Apr 2023

    2023

  30. [38]

    Phan and A

    D. Phan and A. V. Chubukov, ``Following the Higgs mode across the BCS-BEC crossover in two dimensions,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 107, p. 134519, Apr 2023

    2023

  31. [39]

    Li and M

    Y. Li and M. Dzero, ``Collective modes in terahertz field response of disordered superconductors,'' Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter , vol. 37, p. 115602, jan 2025

    2025

  32. [40]

    P. A. Nosov, E. S. Andriyakhina, and I. S. Burmistrov, ``Spatially resolved dynamics of the amplitude Schmid-Higgs mode in disordered superconductors,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 135, p. 056001, Jul 2025

    2025

  33. [41]

    Katsumi, N

    K. Katsumi, N. Tsuji, Y. I. Hamada, R. Matsunaga, J. Schneeloch, R. D. Zhong, G. D. Gu, H. Aoki, Y. Gallais, and R. Shimano, ``Higgs mode in the d -wave superconductor Bi _ 2 Sr _ 2 CaCu _ 2 O _ 8+x driven by an intense terahertz pulse,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 120, p. 117001...

    2018

  34. [42]

    Katsumi, Z

    K. Katsumi, Z. Z. Li, H. Raffy, Y. Gallais, and R. Shimano, ``Superconducting fluctuations probed by the Higgs mode in Bi _ 2 Sr _ 2 Ca Cu _ 2 o _ 8+x thin films,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 102, p. 054510, Aug 2020

    2020

  35. [43]

    Chu, M.-J

    H. Chu, M.-J. Kim, K. Katsumi, S. Kovalev, R. D. Dawson, L. Schwarz, N. Yoshikawa, G. Kim, D. Putzky, Z. Z. Li, H. Raffy, S. Germanskiy, J.-C. Deinert, N. Awari, I. Ilyakov, B. Green, M. Chen, M. Bawatna, G. Cristiani, G. Logvenov, Y. Gallais, A. V. Boris, B. Keimer, A. P. Sch...

    2020

  36. [44]

    Barlas and C

    Y. Barlas and C. M. Varma, ``Amplitude or higgs modes in d -wave superconductors,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 87, p. 054503, Feb 2013

    2013

  37. [45]

    Peronaci, M

    F. Peronaci, M. Schir\'o, and M. Capone, ``Transient dynamics of d -wave superconductors after a sudden excitation,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 115, p. 257001, Dec 2015

    2015

  38. [46]

    A. A. Kirmani and M. Dzero, ``Non-adiabatic dynamics in d+id -wave fermionic superfluids,'' Journal of Superconductivity and Novel Magnetism , vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 3473--3481, 2019

    2019

  39. [47]

    Yang and M

    F. Yang and M. W. Wu, ``Theory of Higgs modes in d -wave superconductors,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 102, p. 014511, Jul 2020

    2020

  40. [48]

    R. A. Barankov, L. S. Levitov, and B. Z. Spivak, ``Solitons and Rabi oscillations in a time-dependent BCS pairing problem,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 93, p. 160401, 2004

    2004

  41. [49]

    R. A. Barankov and L. S. Levitov, ``Dynamical selection in developing fermionic pairing,'' Phys. Rev. A , vol. 73, p. 033614, 2006

    2006

  42. [50]

    R. A. Barankov and L. S. Levitov, ``Excitation of the dissipationless Higgs mode in a fermionic condensate,'' arXiv:0704.1292 , 2007

    2007 arXiv

  43. [51]

    E. A. Yuzbashyan, B. L. Altshuler, V. B. Kuznetsov, and V. Z. Enolskii, ``Solution for the dynamics of the BCS and central spin problems,'' J. Phys. A , vol. 38, p. 7831, 2005

    2005

  44. [52]

    E. A. Yuzbashyan, B. L. Altshuler, V. B. Kuznetsov, and V. Z. Enolskii, ``Nonequilibrium Cooper pairing in the nonadiabatic regime,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 72, p. 220503(R), 2005

    2005

  45. [53]

    E. A. Yuzbashyan, O. Tsyplyatyev, and B. L. Altshuler, ``Relaxation and persistent oscillations of the order parameter in the non-stationary BCS theory,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 96, p. 097005, 2006. Erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 , 179905 (2006)

    2006

  46. [54]

    E. A. Yuzbashyan, ``Normal and anomalous solitons in the theory of dynamical Cooper pairing,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 78, p. 184507, 2008

    2008

  47. [55]

    E. A. Yuzbashyan, M. Dzero, V. Gurarie, and M. S. Foster, ``Quantum quench phase diagrams of an s -wave BCS-BEC condensate,'' Phys. Rev. A , vol. 91, p. 033628, Mar 2015

    2015

  48. [56]

    Li and M

    Y. Li and M. Dzero, ``Amplitude Higgs mode in superconductors with magnetic impurities,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 109, p. 054520, Feb 2024

    2024

  49. [57]

    Dzero and A

    M. Dzero and A. Kamenev, ``Schmid-Higgs mode in the presence of pair-breaking interactions,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 111, p. 174502, May 2025

    2025

  50. [58]

    A. I. Larkin, ``Quasiclassical method in the theory of superconductivity,'' Sov. Phys. - JETP , vol. 20, p. 208, 1965

    1965

  51. [59]

    Eilenberger, ``Transformation of Gorkov's equation for type-II superconductors into transport-like equations,'' Zeitschrift f \"u r Physik A Hadrons and nuclei , vol

    G. Eilenberger, ``Transformation of Gorkov's equation for type-II superconductors into transport-like equations,'' Zeitschrift f \"u r Physik A Hadrons and nuclei , vol. 214, no. 2, pp. 195--213, 1968

    1968

  52. [60]

    Belzig, F

    W. Belzig, F. K. Wilhelm, C. Bruder, G. Schön, and A. D. Zaikin, ``Quasiclassical Green’s function approach to mesoscopic superconductivity,'' Superlattices and Microstructures , vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 1251--1288, 1999

    1999

  53. [61]

    A. B. Vorontsov, J. A. Sauls, and M. J. Graf, ``Phase diagram and spectroscopy of Fulde-Ferrell-Larkin-Ovchinnikov states of two-dimensional d -wave superconductors,'' Phys. Rev. B , vol. 72, p. 184501, Nov 2005

    2005

  54. [62]

    Kamenev and A

    A. Kamenev and A. Levchenko, ``Keldysh technique and non-linear -model: basic principles and applications,'' Advances in Physics , vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 197--319, 2009

    2009

  55. [63]

    Kamenev, Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems

    A. Kamenev, Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems . Cambridge University Press, 2011

    2011

  56. [64]

    V. P. Mineev and K. V. Samokhin, Introduction to Unconventional Superconductivity . CRC Press, 1999

    1999

  57. [65]

    Petrovic, P

    C. Petrovic, P. Pagliuso, M. Hundley, R. Movshovich, J. Sarrao, J. Thompson, Z. Fisk, and P. Monthoux, ``Heavy-fermion superconductivity in CeCoIn _5 at 2.3 K,'' Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter , vol. 13, no. 17, p. L337, 2001

    2001

  58. [66]

    Movshovich, M

    R. Movshovich, M. Jaime, J. Thompson, C. Petrovic, Z. Fisk, P. Pagliuso, and J. Sarrao, ``Unconventional superconductivity in CeIrIn _5 and CeCoIn _5 : Specific heat and thermal conductivity studies,'' Physical review letters , vol. 86, no. 22, p. 5152, 2001

    2001

  59. [67]

    Sarrao and J

    J. Sarrao and J. Thompson, ``Superconductivity in cerium- and plutonium-based ‘115’ materials,'' Journal of the Physical Society of Japan , vol. 76, pp. 1013--, 05 2007

    2007

  60. [68]

    Steglich, J

    F. Steglich, J. Aarts, C. D. Bredl, W. Lieke, D. Meschede, W. Franz, and H. Sch\"afer, ``Superconductivity in the presence of strong pauli paramagnetism: Ce Cu _ 2 Si _ 2 ,'' Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 43, pp. 1892--1896, Dec 1979

    1979

  61. [69]

    Miyake, ``New trend of superconductivity in strongly correlated electron systems,'' Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter , vol

    K. Miyake, ``New trend of superconductivity in strongly correlated electron systems,'' Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter , vol. 19, p. 125201, mar 2007

    2007

  62. [70]

    J. S. Van Dyke, F. Massee, M. P. Allan, J. S. Davis, C. Petrovic, and D. K. Morr, ``Direct evidence for a magnetic f-electron--mediated pairing mechanism of heavy-fermion superconductivity in CeCoIn _5 ,'' Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , vol. 111, no. 32, pp....

    2014

  63. [71]

    K. R. Islam, S. Awelewa, M. Dzero and A. Chubukov, unpublished

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.