Coherent driving of displacive Higgs fluctuations in superconductors

Claudio Castellani; Goetz Seibold; Irene Zanotti; Jacopo Fiore; Kota Katsumi; Lara Benfatto; N. P. Armitage

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 65 references

Coherent driving of displacive Higgs fluctuations in superconductors

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that intense terahertz light above the gap displaces the superconducting order parameter, and that static shift drives the nonlinear first-harmonic signal.

desk verdict The displacive-Higgs mechanism is a real, analytically grounded new result; the uncomputed inelastic rate and the thin experimental phase data are the soft spots. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.16055 v1 pith:73VXQ3JH submitted 2026-07-17 cond-mat.supr-con

Jacopo Fiore , Irene Zanotti , Kota Katsumi , N. P. Armitage , Claudio Castellani , Goetz Seibold , Lara Benfatto This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.supr-con PACS 74.25.Gz

keywords Higgsmodedisplaciveexcitationnonlinearfirstharmonicterahertzspectroscopysuperconductingorderparameterdisorderpump-probeenergyrelaxation

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

The paper identifies a mechanism by which intense terahertz light drives the Higgs (amplitude) mode in superconductors: not by resonantly ringing it at twice the gap, but by absorbing quasiparticles above the gap, which shifts the static order parameter. That static displacement then modulates the linear optical susceptibility and generates a long-lived, rectified nonlinear signal. The authors derive a closed expression for this displacive current and validate it numerically for disordered s-wave and d-wave models and experimentally through the temperature-dependent phase of the nonlinear first harmonic in NbN. If correct, the mechanism unifies several observed terahertz effects — first-harmonic enhancement at 2Δ, a phase jump at that temperature, and slow pump-probe decay — and explains why d-wave superconductors show no sharp first-harmonic resonance. The result matters because it shows nonlinear spectroscopy can measure how light moves a collective order parameter, not just how it excites oscillations.

What carries the argument

The central object is the static order-parameter displacement δΔ(ω), the zero-frequency Higgs fluctuation induced by difference-frequency mixing of two pump photons. The key identity factors the nonlinear current as a parametric modulation of the linear susceptibility: j_NL(ω+Ω) = (∂χ(Ω)/∂Δ) δΔ(ω) A(Ω), with δΔ(ω) ≈ [2i Im χ(Ω)/(ω+iη)] H(ω) A(Ω) A(ω−Ω). The 1/(ω+iη) pole arises because the pairing operator is diagonal in the quasiparticle basis under Anderson-theorem pairing, so absorbed energy is converted into a static deformation rather than into decaying oscillations. The Higgs propagator H(ω) is finite at ω=0, so the enhancement comes from the divergent susceptibility, not from resonant

What would settle it

Measure, in the same s-wave NbN film, the pump-probe decay time and the phase of the nonlinear first harmonic while increasing disorder (for example by ion irradiation) at fixed pump frequency: the model predicts the decay time tracks the energy-relaxation rate 1/η and the phase jump stays at 2Δ(T)=Ω; if the decay time instead tracks the momentum-relaxation rate, or the phase jump broadens with disorder, the factorization in Eq. (7) fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the dominant nonlinear first-harmonic current in a superconductor driven by a nearly monochromatic terahertz pulse has displacive form: j_NL(ω+Ω) ≈ (∂χ(Ω)/∂Δ) δΔ(ω) A(Ω), where δΔ(ω) ≈ [2i Im χ(Ω)/(ω+iη)] H(ω) A(Ω) A(ω−Ω). Here χ is the linear optical susceptibility, Δ the superconducting order parameter, H the Higgs-mode propagator, and η an inelastic scattering rate. The mechanism is activated when the pump frequency exceeds the gap: quasiparticle absorption (Im χ ≠ 0) drives a static shift of the order parameter, which then modulates the susceptibility to emit a rectified signal. The authors show that this process dominates over resonant Higgs driving at 2Ω=2Δ, t

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the static gap shift comes entirely from quasiparticle absorption in a disordered superconductor with Anderson-theorem pairing, and that all inelastic damping can be rolled into one adjustable rate η; if inelastic vertex corrections or spatial gap inhomogeneity alter the 1/(ω+iη) pole, the predicted phase shift and decay time lose their quantitative grounding.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In dirty s-wave superconductors, the first-harmonic peak at Ω=2Δ is displacive, not resonant: the resonant 2Ω channel is subleading (scaling as 1/√η) compared with the 1/η static displacement.
The phase of the nonlinear first harmonic tracks ∂χ/∂Δ, so it shifts by roughly π/2 as temperature moves 2Δ(T) through the pump frequency; this matches the measured NbN phase behavior.
Pump-probe experiments should show a non-oscillating, rectified signal decaying as exp(−ητ), with η the energy-relaxation rate — distinguishing energy dissipation from the momentum relaxation probed by linear response.
In d-wave superconductors, nodal quasiparticles smooth the absorption edge, removing the sharp onset of δΔ and the ∂χ/∂Δ divergence, so no strong first-harmonic resonance at 2Δ is expected, while the 1/η scaling of the static gap shift remains.
The displacive mechanism assigns long-lived pump-probe signals, previously attributed generically to condensate depletion, to a specific static modulation of the order-parameter amplitude.

Reading between the lines

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

This suggests the same absorption-to-static-deformation logic should apply to other collective orders whose order-parameter operator has a finite diagonal projection on quasiparticle eigenstates, making terahertz nonlinear spectroscopy a generic probe of how light moves order parameters.
If the 1/η pole is robust, the pump-probe decay time offers a direct measurement of the energy-relaxation rate, potentially comparable with inelastic rates inferred from transport or other spectroscopies in the same materials.
Adding spatial gap fluctuations beyond Anderson's theorem would test whether the sharp phase jump survives in more strongly disordered films; if it does not, the mechanism may be limited to regimes where pairing is locally translationally symmetric.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

Read this one. The core claim is that the enhanced first-harmonic signal at 2Delta in s-wave NbN is not resonant Higgs excitation but a static order-parameter shift driven by quasiparticle absorption, which then modulates the linear conductivity: j_NL = (d chi/d Delta) delta Delta A. The paper derives that factorization from a BCS/RPA calculation with disorder treated exactly, checks it numerically in Fig. 3d and against a Zimmermann approximation in Fig. 3c, and shows the same 1/eta scaling in d-wave. That is genuinely new—previous work attributed the FH enhancement to resonant processes, and this gives a concrete microscopic picture plus a phase prediction that appears to match.

What I like: the derivation is analytic, not a fit. The decomposition is physical and testable. The paper is honest about what it cannot compute—it states in the text that inelastic scattering is not explicitly computed, so eta is an input. The d-wave prediction of no sharp FH resonance is a useful discriminant.

Where I'd push: the numerical validation of the factorization is partly a consistency check—delta Delta(0) and d chi/d Delta are extracted from the same BdG/RPA calculation that produced j_NL, so Fig. 3d confirms the decomposition but not the ingredients independently. More importantly, the experimental phase data in Fig. 4b appear without error bars or a methods paragraph, and the simulation of that data uses gamma/(2Delta)=1.5, while the factorization check in Fig. 3d is shown at gamma/2Delta~0.5. The stress-test note is right that the accuracy of the factorization at stronger disorder, where Anderson-theorem assumptions about homogeneous pairing are less secure, is undocumented. If inhomogeneous pairing contributes there, the pole structure in Eq. (7) changes and the phase shift prediction loses quantitative grounding. Also, eta is never computed from microscopics; the 1/eta divergence and the decay time 1/eta in pump-probe are input dependent, not predictions. That doesn't kill the paper—the qualitative mechanism is plausible and well-supported—but it means the quantitative content of the headline claim (phase shift magnitude, decay time) is not yet nailed.

Bottom line: this deserves a serious referee. I'd send it out, with attention on the experimental methods and on whether the factorization survives at the disorder level used in the phase simulation. I'd cite it if I work in this area, and I'd bring it to the reading group—it's a clear, useful mechanism with testable consequences.

Recommendation: send to referees, but the experimental phase measurement needs error bars and the eta identification needs either a microscopic estimate or a clear statement that it's a phenomenological parameter.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that the dominant nonlinear first-harmonic current in a superconductor driven by a nearly monochromatic THz pulse arises from a displacive mechanism: quasiparticle absorption above 2Δ activates a zero-frequency (static) shift δΔ of the superconducting order parameter, which then modulates the linear optical susceptibility and generates the nonlinear signal j_NL(Ω) ≈ (∂χ/∂Δ) δΔ(0) A(Ω). This factorization is derived analytically from a Lehmann representation of the relevant response functions (Eqs. 5–10), with δΔ(ω) ∼ [2i Imχ(Ω)/(ω+iη)] H(ω) A(Ω) A(ω−Ω). The authors support the derivation with BdG/RPA numerical simulations on disordered lattices (Fig. 3), an analytical Zimmermann-type calculation, and experimental measurements of the temperature-dependent phase of the nonlinear first harmonic in s-wave NbN (Fig. 4). The paper further argues that the same mechanism explains the long-lived pump-probe signal, whose decay is set by the inelastic scattering rate η, and the absence of a sharp FH resonance in d-wave superconductors because low-energy nodal excitations smooth out Imχ(Ω).

Significance. If the central factorization Eq. (9) holds, the paper provides a unifying and testable explanation for several nonlinear THz experiments in superconductors: the FH enhancement at Ω=2Δ in s-wave NbN, the accompanying phase shift of the FH signal, the long-lived 1/η pump-probe response, and the smooth d-wave FH response. The analytical Lehmann construction and the exact-disorder BdG/RPA approach are well matched to the problem, and the paper makes concrete falsifiable predictions (e.g., the absence of a sharp FH resonance in d-wave systems). The analogy to displacive excitation of coherent phonons is conceptually valuable and clearly drawn. These are substantial strengths. The main weaknesses are that the quantitative validation of the factorization is performed in a narrower disorder range than that used for the experimental phase comparison, and that the key dissipation rate η is an input parameter rather than a calculated quantity. Both issues are acknowledged in the text, but they limit the strength of the quantitative claims made in the abstract and conclusions.

major comments (4)

[FH in s-wave superconductors; Fig. 3 and Fig. 4] The central factorization Eq. (9) is directly tested numerically only for the disorder parameters of Fig. 1b, γ/(2Δ)=0.5, and the analytical Zimmermann comparison in Fig. 3c uses γ/(2Δ)≈0.7. The text states that the agreement improves for γ/(2Δ)<1. However, the phase simulation for the experimental comparison in Fig. 4a uses γ/(2Δ)=1.5, i.e., outside the validated regime and in a parameter range where the Anderson-theorem/uniform-Δ assumptions behind Eqs. (5)–(7) are most questionable. Since the phase shift is the paper's main experimental validation, the authors should either extend the numerical test of Eq. (9) to γ/(2Δ)≈1.5 or provide a separate analytical estimate of the corrections from inhomogeneous pairing at strong disorder. Without this, the experimental agreement in Fig. 4b does not establish the mechanism under the experimental conditions.
[Model; Displacive driving of the Higgs mode; Eq. (11) and Eq. (14)] The paper explicitly states that η is not computed: 'any additional source of damping, like the eta parameter appearing in Eq. (2), can only be provided by inelastic scattering processes, which are not explicitly computed in the present treatment.' Equations (10) and (14) nevertheless make the quantitative predictions δΔ(0)∼1/η and a decay time 1/η. Equation (11) is a formal power-absorption identity, not a microscopic calculation of η. Thus the absolute magnitude of the enhancement and the relaxation time are parameterized by an input, not derived. The scaling form is a valid prediction, but the claim that the work 'provides and quantifies a specific microscopic mechanism' overstates what is established. This limitation should be stated in the abstract and conclusions, and the text should distinguish more carefully between the predicted 1/η scaling and the unknown prefactor set by the i
[Fig. 3d; validation of Eq. (9)] The numerical check in Fig. 3d extracts δΔ(0) and ∂χ/∂Δ from the same BdG/RPA calculation that produces j_NL^{Higgs}. Agreement with Eq. (9) is then partly a self-consistency test, because the identity is built from the same response functions. The more independent check is the Zimmermann analytical product in Fig. 3c, but that curve uses phenomenological γ and η values chosen to be 'consistent with numerical simulations.' The authors should explicitly acknowledge the partial circularity and preferably provide at least one direct evaluation of Eq. (9) where the two factors are obtained from independent calculations (e.g., a clean-limit analytical estimate or a separate numerical protocol).
[Fingerprints of displacive Higgs excitation; Fig. 4] The experimental phase data are presented without error bars, statistical information, or a description of the extraction procedure in the main text; the reader is referred to Supplementary [44]. Because this is the only experimental validation of the central mechanism, the main text should at least report uncertainties on φ_exp and state how many samples/measurements are included. The statement 'we report the measured value ... of φ_exp' is too thin for a quantitative claim, especially since the theoretical curve depends on the phenomenological parameters γ/(2Δ)=1.5 and η/(2Δ)=0.05.

minor comments (4)

[Fig. 3 caption] The labels 'N' and 'A' in the caption are not defined; please spell out 'numerical' and 'analytical' in the caption. Also define 'H' in Fig. 1 caption (Higgs fluctuations).
[Eq. (4) and surrounding text] The notation 'iΩ12...' is introduced without a definition. A one-sentence definition of iΩij... would help the reader follow the frequency assignments and the analytical continuations in Eqs. (5)–(8).
[General] Most derivations, including the Lehmann representation (Eq. 5), the Zimmermann approximation, and the pump-probe formula (Eq. 12), are delegated to Supplementary [44] with no equation numbers. Please add specific equation references (e.g., 'SM Eq. (S10)') so that the claims can be checked.
[Abstract] The phrase 'non-resonant static displacement' may be misleading: the displacement is at zero frequency, but it is activated by resonant absorption above 2Δ. Consider rewording to 'zero-frequency (rectified) displacement driven by quasiparticle absorption.'

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

Central factorization is derived analytically and tested against experiment, but the numerical check of Eq. (9) in Fig. 3d is partly a self-consistency check, and the 1/η scaling in Fig. 6 is an input variation rather than a new prediction.

fitted input called prediction [Section 'FH in s-wave superconductors', Fig. 3 and Eq. (9)]
"we extract from the numerical results themselves both the static fluctuations of the order parameter δ∆(ω=0), shown in Fig. 3a, and ∂χ(Ω)/∂∆, shown in Fig. 3b, and we use them to evaluate Eq. (9) ... As shown in panel 3d the expression provided by Eq. (9) is in excellent agreement with the full result"

The numerical verification of Eq. (9) uses the same BdG/RPA calculation that produced j_NL. δ∆(0) and ∂χ/∂∆ are extracted from the same numerical solution, so their product is a consistency check rather than an independent test. This does not invalidate the analytic derivation, but the agreement is partly built in.

full rationale

The core derivation (Eqs. 5–10) is analytic and self-contained: it starts from a matrix-element expression for the two bubbles in the Feynman diagram, performs the Matsubara continuation, and obtains the factorized form j_NL = ∂χ/∂∆ · δ∆ · A. This is not a fit of the final answer; it is a genuine reduction of the diagrammatic structure. The experimental phase-shift comparison in Fig. 4 is an independent external benchmark. However, the numerical confirmation in Fig. 3d is limited because the two factors in Eq. (9) are taken from the same numerical model that also produces the full j_NL, so the agreement is a self-consistency check. The 1/η scaling in Fig. 6 is also a parametric scaling of an input scattering rate that the paper explicitly does not compute microscopically (the text concedes inelastic scattering processes 'are not explicitly computed'). That makes η an input parameter, but the paper does not claim to predict η; it predicts the functional form of the response given η. The disorder-dependence check is only shown for one moderate disorder value (γ/2Δ = 0.5) in Fig. 3d while the experimental phase simulation uses γ/2Δ = 1.5; the paper itself notes agreement with Eq. (9) improves for weaker disorder. This is a limitation in the scope of validation, not a circular definition. Overall, the central claim has substantial independent analytical and experimental content, so the circularity score is modest.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard BCS/BdG mean-field theory, Anderson-theorem pairing, an RPA Higgs propagator, and a purely phenomenological inelastic rate eta. The paper introduces no new physical entities; the Higgs mode is a known collective excitation. The free parameters gamma and eta control the quantitative curves and the experimental comparison but not the existence of the mechanism itself.

free parameters (3)

gamma/(2Delta) elastic scattering rate = 0.2, 0.5, 0.67, 2.0 in Fig. 1; 1.5 in Fig. 4a
Disorder-broadening parameter in the Zimmermann approximation. It shapes the phase profile and peak height of the predicted FH response; for the NbN comparison it is used at gamma/(2Delta)=1.5 without an independent determination from the sample.
eta/(2Delta) inelastic scattering / energy-relaxation rate = 0.02 (Fig. 3c), 0.05 (Fig. 4a), 0.01 (Fig. 5)
Phenomenological cutoff inserted into Eq. (2)/(7) to regularize the 1/omega divergence. It controls the magnitude of delta-Delta, the 1/eta decay time, and the width of the phase transition profile, but is not computed from any microscopic model. The paper explicitly states that inelastic scattering is not computed, yet later identifies eta with the energy-dissipation rate.
d-wave model parameters J/t and t'/t = J/t = 1, t'/t = -0.2
Chosen to mimic cuprate superconductors. These determine the d-wave gap structure and hence the smooth Im chi(Omega) that suppresses the sharp FH Higgs resonance. Not fitted to target data, but the d-wave prediction is conditioned on this parameter choice.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption BCS mean-field / Bogoliubov-de Gennes decoupling of the attractive interaction is valid for the disorder strengths considered.
The entire model (Eq. 3) and the numerical ground-state construction assume local BCS pairing; strong disorder could drive inhomogeneous pairing beyond this treatment.
domain assumption Anderson's theorem: pairing occurs between time-reversed exact disorder eigenstates, and spatial fluctuations of the order parameter can be neglected.
This is used to derive the Lehmann representation in Eq. (5) and the factorization in Eq. (7)-(9). If strong disorder violates this condition, the analytical factorization and the identification of the dominant process may fail.
domain assumption The Higgs (amplitude) mode is an RPA collective mode with propagator H(omega), and it behaves as a conserved quantity in the quasiparticle basis, giving the 1/omega divergence in chi_{Delta,AA}.
The conserved-quantity condition is asserted in the text and is used to connect delta-Delta to the energy-absorption formula Eq. (11). No explicit proof of the conservation statement is given in the main text.
ad hoc to paper Inelastic scattering can be represented by a single constant eta inserted into retarded response functions.
The paper states that eta is not explicitly computed. All quantitative results (Figs. 3c, 4a, 5) and the predicted 1/eta relaxation time depend on this phenomenological parameter.
domain assumption The pump is a nearly monochromatic multicycle pulse (omega -> 0 limit) and the theory is evaluated at T=0.
The analytical formulas use omega ~ 0 and T=0; temperature enters only through Delta(T) in the comparison with the NbN phase data. Broadband-pulse effects are discussed qualitatively but not derived in the main text.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Coherent driving of displacive Higgs fluctuations in superconductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/73VXQ3JH

@misc{pith2026260716055,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Coherent driving of displacive Higgs fluctuations in superconductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/73VXQ3JH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.16055}
}

abstract

Intense phase-stable terahertz (THz) laser pulses can drive collective modes coherently via multi-photon excitation pathways in a manner different than the standard resonant mechanism operative in linear response. Here we show that in superconductors the nonlinear optical response can be enhanced when excited quasiparticles activate a (non-resonant) static displacement of the superconducting order parameter, in full analogy with the displacive excitation of coherent phonons in opaque materials. By combining numerical simulations with analytical results we demonstrate that the displacive mechanism to excite the Higgs mode is operative in both $s$-wave and $d$-wave superconductors. We validate this prediction experimentally by the temperature dependence of the phase of the nonlinear first harmonic in superconducting $s$-wave NbN. We also discuss how the order-parameter relaxation at large times, which can be experimentally accessed via pump-probe protocols is connected to energy-dissipative processes. Our results offer a novel perspective on the ability of intense THz fields to measure, and eventually control, the parametric dependence of the optical response on collective degrees of freedom.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.16055 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Top: Feynman’s diagram of the amplitude-mode con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. (a) Static [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a): Theoretical phase shift on the nonlinear FH [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a): The spectral envelope [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Scaling analysis of the pump-induced variation of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

[44]

impulsive

for further details. In panel (a) we show the spec- trum of theA τ (ω) (solid lines) along with the one of A2 τ (ω) (dashed lines). For a pump centered at Ω,A 2 τ (ω) has its main spectral components atω≃0, correspond- ing to a difference-frequency process with two photons of opposite frequency, and atω≃2Ω, corresponding to a sum-frequency process with tw...
[1]

The process depicted in Fig. 2 is obtained by taking iΩ1, iΩ3 →Ω +iηandiΩ 2 →ω−Ω +iη, such that iΩ12 →ω+iηandiΩ 123 →Ω +ω+iη, whereη >0 is a vanishing positive quantity to ensure the analytical con- tinuation of the retarded response function [12, 47, 49]. Whenω→0 one obtains a nonlinear FH contribution. In this limit, the two response functions appearing...
[2]

Giannetti, M

C. Giannetti, M. Capone, D. Fausti, M. Fabrizio, F. Parmigiani, and D. Mihailovic, Ultrafast optical spectroscopy of strongly correlated materials and high- temperature superconductors: A non-equilibrium ap- proach, Advances in Physics65, 58 (2016)

2016
[3]

Fabrizio,A Course in Quantum Many-Body Theory: From Conventional Fermi Liquids to Strongly Correlated Systems, Graduate Texts in Physics (Springer Interna- tional Publishing, 2022)

M. Fabrizio,A Course in Quantum Many-Body Theory: From Conventional Fermi Liquids to Strongly Correlated Systems, Graduate Texts in Physics (Springer Interna- tional Publishing, 2022)

2022
[4]

Shimano and N

R. Shimano and N. Tsuji, Higgs Mode in Superconduc- tors, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics11, 103 (2020)

2020
[5]

C.-J. Yang, J. Li, M. Fiebig, and S. Pal, Terahertz control of many-body dynamics in quantum materials, Nature Reviews Materials8, 518 (2023)

2023
[6]

Zimmermann, E

W. Zimmermann, E. H. Brandt, M. Bauer, E. Seider, and L. Genzel, Optical conductivity of BCS superconductors with arbitrary purity, Physica C: Superconductivity183, 99 (1991)

1991
[7]

D. C. Mattis and J. Bardeen, Theory of the Anoma- lous Skin Effect in Normal and Superconducting Metals, Physical Review111, 412 (1958)

1958

Show all 65 references

[8]

H. J. Zeiger, J. Vidal, T. K. Cheng, E. P. Ippen, G. Dres- selhaus, and M. S. Dresselhaus, Theory for displacive excitation of coherent phonons, Phys. Rev. B45, 768 (1992). 10

1992
[9]

Merlin, Generating coherent THz phonons with light pulses, Solid State Communications102, 207 (1997)

R. Merlin, Generating coherent THz phonons with light pulses, Solid State Communications102, 207 (1997)

1997
[10]

T. K. Cheng, S. D. Brorson, A. S. Kazeroonian, J. S. Moodera, G. Dresselhaus, M. S. Dresselhaus, and E. P. Ippen, Impulsive excitation of coherent phonons observed in reflection in bismuth and antimony, Applied Physics Letters57, 1004 (1990)

1990
[11]

T. E. Stevens, J. Kuhl, and R. Merlin, Coherent phonon generation and the two stimulated raman tensors, Phys. Rev. B65, 144304 (2002)

2002
[12]

G. M. Eliashberg, Film superconductivity stimulated by a high-frequency field, JETP Letters11(1970)

1970
[13]

Fischer, J

P. Fischer, J. B¨ ar, M. Cimander, L. Feuerer, V. Wiechert, O. Tereshchenko, and D. Bossini, Microscopic mecha- nism of displacive excitation of coherent phonons in a bulk rashba semiconductor, Phys. Rev. B111, L081201 (2025)

2025
[14]

Mukamel,Principles of Nonlinear Optical Spectroscopy (Oxford University Press, 1995)

S. Mukamel,Principles of Nonlinear Optical Spectroscopy (Oxford University Press, 1995)

1995
[15]

Derendorf, A

P. Derendorf, A. F. Volkov, and I. M. Eremin, Nonlinear response of diffusive superconductors to ac electromag- netic fields, Physical Review B109, 024510 (2024)

2024
[16]

S. T. Cundiff and S. Mukamel, Optical multidimensional coherent spectroscopy, Physics Today66, 44 (2013)

2013
[17]

Hamm and M

P. Hamm and M. Zanni,Concepts and Methods of 2D In- frared Spectroscopy(Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 2011)

2011
[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 Coher- ent Spectroscopy: The Case of the Amplitude Mode in Superco...

2024
[19]

C. L. Smallwood and S. T. Cundiff, Coherent Spec- troscopy: Multidimensional Coherent Spectroscopy of Semiconductors, Laser & Photonics Reviews12, 1870052 (2018)

2018
[20]

Sobolev, A

S. Sobolev, A. P. Lanz, T. Dong, A. Pokharel, V. Ka- banov, T.-Q. Xu, Y. Wang, Z.-Z. Gan, L.-Y. Shi, N.- L. Wang, A. Pashkin, E. Uykur, S. Winnerl, M. Helm, and J. Demsar, Possible eliashberg-type superconductiv- ity enhancement effects in a two-band superconductor mgb2 driven...

2023
[21]

M. Beck, I. Rousseau, M. Klammer, P. Leiderer, M. Mit- tendorff, S. Winnerl, M. Helm, G. N. Gol’tsman, and J. Demsar, Transient increase of the energy gap of super- conducting nbn thin films excited by resonant narrow- band terahertz pulses, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 267003 (2013)

2013
[22]

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 preces- sion resonating with Higgs mode in a superconductor, Science345, 1145 (2014)

2014
[23]

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−xTixNInduced by Terahertz Pulse Excitation, Physical Review Letters 111, 057002 (2013)

2013
[24]

Barbalas, R

D. Barbalas, R. Romero, D. Chaudhuri, F. Mahmood, H. P. Nair, N. J. Schreiber, D. G. Schlom, K. M. Shen, and N. P. Armitage, Energy Relaxation and Dynam- ics in the Correlated Metal Sr 2 RuO 4 via Terahertz Two-Dimensional Coherent Spectroscopy, Physical Re- view Letters134, 0...

2025
[25]

Chaudhuri, D

D. Chaudhuri, D. Barbalas, F. Mahmood, J. Liang, R. R. III, A. Legros, X. He, H. Raffy, I. Bozovic, and N. P. Ar- mitage, Planckian dissipation, anomalous high temper- ature THz non-linear response and energy relaxation in the strange metal state of the cuprate superconductors...

2025 arXiv
[26]

Kovalev, T

S. Kovalev, T. Dong, L.-Y. Shi, C. Reinhoffer, T.-Q. Xu, H.-Z. Wang, Y. Wang, Z.-Z. Gan, S. Germanskiy, J.-C. Deinert, I. Ilyakov, P. H. M. van Loosdrecht, D. Wu, N.- L. Wang, J. Demsar, and Z. Wang, Band-selective third- harmonic generation in superconducting MgB 2: Possible ...

2021
[27]

Matsunaga, N

R. Matsunaga, N. Tsuji, K. Makise, H. Terai, H. Aoki, and R. Shimano, Polarization-resolved terahertz third- harmonic generation in a single-crystal superconductor NbN: Dominance of the Higgs mode beyond the BCS approximation, Physical Review B96, 020505 (2017)

2017
[28]

H. Chu, S. Kovalev, Z. X. Wang, L. Schwarz, T. Dong, L. Feng, R. Haenel, M.-J. Kim, P. Shabestari, L. P. Hoang, K. Honasoge, R. D. Dawson, D. Putzky, G. Kim, M. Puviani, M. Chen, N. Awari, A. N. Ponomaryov, I. Ilyakov, M. Bluschke, F. Boschini, M. Zonno, S. Zh- danovich, M. Na...

2023
[29]

Chu, M.-J

H. Chu, M.-J. Kim, K. Katsumi, S. Kovalev, R. D. Daw- son, 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. S...

2020
[30]

Grasset, K

R. Grasset, K. Katsumi, P. Massat, H.-H. Wen, X.- H. Chen, Y. Gallais, and R. Shimano, Terahertz pulse- driven collective mode in the nematic superconducting state of Ba1-xKxFe2As2, npj Quantum Materials7, 1 (2022)

2022
[31]

J. Yuan, L. Shi, L. Yue, B. Li, Z. Wang, S. Xu, T. Xu, Y. Wang, Z. Gan, F. Chen, Z. Lin, X. Wang, K. Jin, X. Wang, J. Luo, S. Zhang, Q. Wu, Q. Liu, T. Hu, R. Li, X. Zhou, D. Wu, T. Dong, and N. Wang, Dynamical interplay between superconductivity and pseudogap in cuprates as re...

2024
[32]

Katsumi, J

K. Katsumi, J. Liang, R. Romero, K. Chen, X. Xi, and N. P. Armitage, Amplitude mode in a multigap supercon- ductor Mgb 2 investigated by terahertz two-dimensional coherent spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 036902 (2025)

2025
[33]

M.-J. Kim, S. Kovalev, M. Udina, R. Haenel, G. Kim, M. Puviani, G. Cristiani, I. Ilyakov, T. V. A. G. de Oliveira, A. Ponomaryov, J.-C. Deinert, G. Logvenov, B. Keimer, D. Manske, L. Benfatto, and S. Kaiser, Trac- ing the dynamics of superconducting order via transient teraher...

2024
[34]

T. Cea, C. Castellani, and L. Benfatto, Nonlinear op- tical effects and third-harmonic generation in supercon- ductors: Cooper pairs versus Higgs mode contribution, Physical Review B93, 180507 (2016)

2016
[35]

Katsumi, N

K. Katsumi, N. Tsuji, Y. I. Hamada, R. Matsunaga, J. Schneeloch, R. D. Zhong, G. D. Gu, H. Aoki, Y. Gal- 11 lais, and R. Shimano, Higgs Mode in thed-Wave Super- conductor Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+x Driven by an Intense Tera- hertz Pulse, Physical Review Letters120, 117001 (2018)

2018
[36]

Seibold, M

G. Seibold, M. Udina, C. Castellani, and L. Benfatto, Third harmonic generation from collective modes in dis- ordered superconductors, Physical Review B103, 014512 (2021)

2021
[37]

Silaev, Nonlinear electromagnetic response and Higgs- mode excitation in BCS superconductors with impurities, Physical Review B99, 224511 (2019)

M. Silaev, Nonlinear electromagnetic response and Higgs- mode excitation in BCS superconductors with impurities, Physical Review B99, 224511 (2019)

2019
[38]

Schwarz and D

L. Schwarz and D. Manske, Theory of driven Higgs oscil- lations and third-harmonic generation in unconventional superconductors, Physical Review B101, 184519 (2020)

2020
[39]

Tsuji and H

N. Tsuji and H. Aoki, Theory of Anderson pseudospin resonance with Higgs mode in superconductors, Physical Review B92, 064508 (2015)

2015
[40]

Schwarz, B

L. Schwarz, B. Fauseweh, N. Tsuji, N. Cheng, N. Bit- tner, H. Krull, M. Berciu, G. S. Uhrig, A. P. Schny- der, S. Kaiser, and D. Manske, Classification and char- acterization of nonequilibrium Higgs modes in unconven- tional superconductors, Nature Communications11, 287 (2020)

2020
[41]

Tsuji and Y

N. Tsuji and Y. Nomura, Higgs-mode resonance in third harmonic generation in NbN superconductors: Multiband electron-phonon coupling, impurity scatter- ing, and polarization-angle dependence, Physical Review Research2, 043029 (2020)

2020
[42]

Benfatto, C

L. Benfatto, C. Castellani, and G. Seibold, Linear and nonlinear current response in disorderedd-wave super- conductors, Physical Review B108, 134508 (2023)

2023
[43]

Ghosal, M

A. Ghosal, M. Randeria, and N. Trivedi, Inhomoge- neous pairing in highly disordered s-wave superconduc- tors, Phys. Rev. B65, 014501 (2001)

2001
[45]

Haenel, P

R. Haenel, P. Froese, D. Manske, and L. Schwarz, Time- resolved optical conductivity and Higgs oscillations in two-band dirty superconductors, Physical Review B104, 134504 (2021)

2021
[46]

Supplementary information
[47]

Seibold, On the Evaluation of Higher-Harmonic- Current Responses for High-Field Spectroscopies in Disordered Superconductors, Condensed Matter8, 95 (2023)

G. Seibold, On the Evaluation of Higher-Harmonic- Current Responses for High-Field Spectroscopies in Disordered Superconductors, Condensed Matter8, 95 (2023)

2023
[48]

Tsuji, Two-dimensional coherent spectroscopy of dis- ordered superconductors in the narrow-band and broad- band limits, Phys

N. Tsuji, Two-dimensional coherent spectroscopy of dis- ordered superconductors in the narrow-band and broad- band limits, Phys. Rev. B113, 214502 (2026)

2026
[49]

Rostami, M

H. Rostami, M. I. Katsnelson, G. Vignale, and M. Polini, Gauge invariance and Ward identities in nonlinear re- sponse theory, Annals of Physics431, 168523 (2021)

2021
[50]

P. W. Anderson, Theory of dirty superconductors, Jour- nal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids11, 26 (1959)

1959
[51]

L. P. Gorkov and G. M. Eliashberg, Superconducting al- loys in a strong alternating field, Sov. Phys. JETP29, 698 (1969)

1969
[52]

Fiore, N

J. Fiore, N. Sellati, M. Udina, and L. Benfatto, Two- dimensional terahertz spectroscopy in electronic systems: A many-body diagrammatic approach, Phys. Rev. B113, 174524 (2026)

2026
[53]

A. F. Volkov and S. M. Kogan, Collisionless relaxation of the energy gap in superconductors, Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics38, 1018 (1974)

1974
[54]

E. A. Yuzbashyan and M. Dzero, Dynamical vanishing of the order parameter in a fermionic condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 230404 (2006)

2006
[55]

Papenkort, V

T. Papenkort, V. M. Axt, and T. Kuhn, Coherent dy- namics and pump-probe spectra of bcs superconductors, Phys. Rev. B76, 224522 (2007)

2007
[56]

Papenkort, T

T. Papenkort, T. Kuhn, and V. M. Axt, Coherent con- trol of the gap dynamics of bcs superconductors in the nonadiabatic regime, Phys. Rev. B78, 132505 (2008)

2008
[57]

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. B90, 014515 (2014)

2014
[58]

G. D. Mahan,Many-Particle Physics(Springer US, Boston, MA, 2000)

2000
[59]

Giorgianni, T

F. Giorgianni, T. Cea, C. Vicario, C. P. Hauri, W. K. Withanage, X. Xi, and L. Benfatto, Leggett mode con- trolled by light pulses, Nature Physics15, 341 (2019)

2019
[60]

X. Yang, C. Vaswani, C. Sundahl, M. Mootz, L. Luo, J. H. Kang, I. E. Perakis, C. B. Eom, and J. Wang, Lightwave-driven gapless superconductivity and forbid- den quantum beats by terahertz symmetry breaking, Na- ture Photonics13, 707 (2019)

2019
[61]

J. Yuan, L. Shi, T. Xu, Y. Wang, Z. Gan, H. Wang, T. Wu, D. Wu, T. Dong, and N. Wang, Selective exci- tation of collective modes in multiband superconductor mgb2, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 166002 (2025)

2025
[62]

Fioreet al., preprint 2026

J. Fioreet al., preprint 2026

2026
[63]

Steineman, S

A. Steineman, S. Awelewa, and M. Dzero, Quasiclassical theory of nonlinear response in d-wave superconductors (2026), arXiv:2606.26909 [cond-mat.supr-con]

2026 arXiv
[64]

Sun, Floquet engineering of many-body states by the ponderomotive potential, Phys

Z. Sun, Floquet engineering of many-body states by the ponderomotive potential, Phys. Rev. B110, 104301 (2024)

2024
[65]

Huang and Z

T. Huang and Z. Sun, Universal phase transitions of mat- ter in optically driven cavities, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 036901 (2026)

2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [44]

impulsive

for further details. In panel (a) we show the spec- trum of theA τ (ω) (solid lines) along with the one of A2 τ (ω) (dashed lines). For a pump centered at Ω,A 2 τ (ω) has its main spectral components atω≃0, correspond- ing to a difference-frequency process with two photons of opposite frequency, and atω≃2Ω, corresponding to a sum-frequency process with tw...

[2] [1]

The process depicted in Fig. 2 is obtained by taking iΩ1, iΩ3 →Ω +iηandiΩ 2 →ω−Ω +iη, such that iΩ12 →ω+iηandiΩ 123 →Ω +ω+iη, whereη >0 is a vanishing positive quantity to ensure the analytical con- tinuation of the retarded response function [12, 47, 49]. Whenω→0 one obtains a nonlinear FH contribution. In this limit, the two response functions appearing...

[3] [2]

Giannetti, M

C. Giannetti, M. Capone, D. Fausti, M. Fabrizio, F. Parmigiani, and D. Mihailovic, Ultrafast optical spectroscopy of strongly correlated materials and high- temperature superconductors: A non-equilibrium ap- proach, Advances in Physics65, 58 (2016)

2016

[4] [3]

Fabrizio,A Course in Quantum Many-Body Theory: From Conventional Fermi Liquids to Strongly Correlated Systems, Graduate Texts in Physics (Springer Interna- tional Publishing, 2022)

M. Fabrizio,A Course in Quantum Many-Body Theory: From Conventional Fermi Liquids to Strongly Correlated Systems, Graduate Texts in Physics (Springer Interna- tional Publishing, 2022)

2022

[5] [4]

Shimano and N

R. Shimano and N. Tsuji, Higgs Mode in Superconduc- tors, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics11, 103 (2020)

2020

[6] [5]

C.-J. Yang, J. Li, M. Fiebig, and S. Pal, Terahertz control of many-body dynamics in quantum materials, Nature Reviews Materials8, 518 (2023)

2023

[7] [6]

Zimmermann, E

W. Zimmermann, E. H. Brandt, M. Bauer, E. Seider, and L. Genzel, Optical conductivity of BCS superconductors with arbitrary purity, Physica C: Superconductivity183, 99 (1991)

1991

[8] [7]

D. C. Mattis and J. Bardeen, Theory of the Anoma- lous Skin Effect in Normal and Superconducting Metals, Physical Review111, 412 (1958)

1958