Higgs-mode-induced instability and kinetic inductance in strongly dc-biased dirty-limit superconductors

Takayuki Kubo

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 62 references

Higgs-mode-induced instability and kinetic inductance in strongly dc-biased dirty-limit superconductors

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

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

Pith's one-line read A strongly dc-biased dirty-limit superconductor can become unstable against parallel ac perturbations because the Higgs mode drives the imaginary part of the conductivity negative in a finite frequency window, an effect that can also…

desk verdict A useful dirty-limit conductivity formula and clean analytic C coefficients, but the headline instability is an interpretation of negative Im sigma, not a derived dynamical instability. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05914 v1 pith:F2EN3CEU submitted 2025-02-09 cond-mat.supr-con physics.acc-phphysics.ins-det

Takayuki Kubo This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.supr-conphysics.acc-phphysics.ins-det

keywords dirty-limitsuperconductivityHiggsmodekineticinductancecomplexconductivityKeldysh-Usadeltheorydepairingcurrentsuperfluiddensityinstabilitynonequilibrium

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 develops a general formula for the complex conductivity of a disordered (dirty-limit) superconductor when a weak ac field is superposed on a dc bias of arbitrary strength. The formula, derived from the Keldysh-Usadel theory of nonequilibrium superconductivity, is the dirty-limit counterpart of earlier clean-limit expressions but is simpler to use. The central claim is that for bias currents above about 60% of the depairing current, the Higgs mode makes the homogeneous superfluid flow unstable against ac perturbations that are parallel to the dc bias, within a frequency window that shrinks as the bias grows. A negative imaginary part of the conductivity in that window signals a negative superfluid density and a tendency toward vortex nucleation or phase slips. In the weak-bias limit the formula reproduces the known quadratic kinetic-inductance dependence with coefficients 0.409 (parallel) and 0.136 (perpendicular).

What carries the argument

The central object is the complex conductivity $\sigma(\omega, J_b)$ of Eq. (40), built from the equilibrium Green's functions $G_b$, $F_b$ of a current-carrying dirty superconductor. The Higgs mode enters through the response of the order parameter to the ac field, $\delta\Delta = \Psi\,\delta W$, where $\delta W$ is proportional to $\mathbf{q}_b\cdot\delta\mathbf{q}$, the overlap of the dc superfluid momentum with the ac perturbation. This coupling is what makes the instability appear only in the ac$\parallel$dc geometry. The instability criterion used is ${\rm Im}\,\sigma < 0$ (equivalently, negative superfluid density), and the kinetic inductance is defined as $L_k = 1/(\omega\,{\rm Im}\,\sigma)$.

What would settle it

Measure the voltage along a dirty-limit superconducting wire carrying a dc bias near $J_{\rm dp}$ while irradiating it with a weak ac field at a frequency inside the predicted instability window of Fig. 6. A finite voltage due to vortex motion, appearing and disappearing as $(\omega, J_b)$ crosses the window boundary, would confirm the instability; its absence would falsify the claim that ${\rm Im}\,\sigma < 0$ is the correct instability condition.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using the Keldysh-Usadel equations for a dirty-limit superconductor, the paper derives a closed-form expression for the linear-response conductivity under an arbitrary dc bias, Eq. (40), which splits into a 'naive' term $\sigma^{(0)}$, plus two nonequilibrium corrections $\sigma^{(1)}$ and $\sigma^{(2)}$ that appear only when the ac field is parallel to the dc bias. The $\sigma^{(2)}$ piece contains the Higgs-mode contribution $\delta\Delta = \Psi\,\delta W$, making the dc bias a knob that amplifies the amplitude mode. Evaluating the formula at zero temperature shows that for $J_b/J_{\rm dp} \gtrsim 0.6$ the imaginary part of the conductivity becomes negative for frequencies between $\omega_1$ and $\omega_2$, and that the window extends down to zero frequency as $J_b/J_{\rm dp}$ approaches about 0.9 before closing again near the depairing current. The paper interprets a negative imaginary part as a negative superfluid density and hence an instability of the homogeneous current-carrying state, leading to predicted phase slips or vortex nucleation; it also shows that near the instability boundary the kinetic inductance can be enhanced by nearly two orders of magnitude.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the criterion that a negative imaginary part of the conductivity (negative superfluid density) directly implies instability of the homogeneous current-carrying state; the paper asserts this as well known rather than deriving it within the driven Keldysh-Usadel framework, and it does not solve the time-dependent equations to show that an inhomogeneous state actually forms.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For bias currents above about $0.6J_{\rm dp}$, a dirty superconductor in the ac$\parallel$dc configuration is vulnerable to ac perturbations in a bias-dependent frequency window; this may lead to vortex nucleation or phase slips.
The kinetic inductance $L_k$ diverges at the boundary of the instability window and can be tuned to be nearly two orders of magnitude larger than its zero-current value by adjusting bias and frequency.
In the weak-bias limit the derived coefficients $C=0.409$ (parallel) and $C=0.136$ (perpendicular) match the old 'oscillating' and 'frozen' superfluid-density assumptions, showing those regimes are controlled by Higgs-mode excitation rather than by the speed of the experiment.
Devices such as superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors, cavities near the superheating field, and superconducting diodes operate near $J_{\rm dp}$ and may already experience this instability as dark counts or performance degradation.
The instability is absent in the ac$\perp$dc configuration and weakens as the mean free path increases, so increasing the mean free path is a straightforward mitigation.

Reading between the lines

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

The criterion that ${\rm Im}\,\sigma < 0$ implies instability is asserted rather than derived; a time-dependent solution of the Usadel equations would be needed to confirm that an inhomogeneous state actually forms and to predict the resulting effective inductance and voltage noise.
Because the instability window shifts with bias, a frequency-tunable detector could be designed where the operating frequency is set by the dc bias; one testable extension would be to map dark counts in a nanowire detector against the $\omega$-$J_b$ plane of Fig. 6.
The same mechanism may lower the effective instability threshold of the superheating field in dirty-limit cavities when weak ac perturbations are present, which could be checked by driving a cavity with a weak parallel ac tone while sweeping the dc bias.

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

Worth a read if you work on kinetic inductance or dirty-limit superconductors under bias. The main new result is Eq. (40), the dirty-limit complex conductivity for arbitrary dc bias, derived from Keldysh-Usadel. It's genuinely simpler than the earlier Keldysh-Eilenberger formulas, and the analytic derivation of the low-bias coefficients C=0.409 and 0.136 is a real step up from the numerical coincidence reported in the author's previous paper. The appendix check against Moor et al. is careful, and the weak-bias limit reduces to known results. The reliance on the author's own earlier papers is fine here, since the analytic derivation reproduces those numbers independently.

The soft spot is the instability claim. The paper equates negative Im sigma at finite frequency with negative superfluid density and then asserts that means the homogeneous state is unstable. That does not follow from the calculation. Negative Im sigma at finite frequency can show up in a stable resonant response; you need a pole of the retarded response or a linear stability analysis of the time-dependent Usadel equation to show a growing mode. The paper itself concedes in Sec. V D that the analysis is confined to the homogeneous solution, so the vortex-nucleation language is speculative. The caution is honest, but the central figure (Fig. 6) is still framed as an instability map rather than as a region where the linear-response conductivity changes sign. The stress-test note is right on this point.

I don't think this is fatal for the paper's main value. The conductivity formula and the C coefficients are solid and reproducible, and the instability prediction is a good candidate for experimental test or further theory. But the manuscript should not present the instability as a proven consequence. The authors should either do the dynamical stability analysis or clearly label the instability domain as a conjecture based on a conventional sign criterion.

For peer review: yes, send it. The derivation is clearly presented, the new analytic results are valuable, and the instability question is important enough to engage with. I'd ask for a revision that addresses the instability criterion.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper derives a complex conductivity formula for a dirty-limit superconductor under an arbitrary dc bias, using Keldysh-Usadel theory. In the ac-parallel-dc configuration the formula contains additional terms (σ(1) and σ(2)) beyond the naive extension of the zero-bias result, and the σ(2) term encodes the Higgs-mode response. The paper then claims that for strong dc bias (Jb/Jdp ≳ 0.6) the imaginary part of the conductivity becomes negative in a finite frequency window (Eq. (44), Fig. 6), which is interpreted as a negative superfluid density and an instability of the homogeneous current-carrying state. Near the boundaries of this window the kinetic inductance is predicted to diverge, and at a nearby stable parameter point it can be enhanced by nearly two orders of magnitude (Figs. 7-8). In the weak-bias limit the paper analytically obtains the coefficients C = 0.409 (ac ∥ dc) and C = 0.136 (ac ⊥ dc) in the kinetic-inductance expansion, matching the earlier results based on oscillating and frozen superfluid-density assumptions.

Significance. If the instability claim is established, the paper would open a new route to controlling kinetic inductance and would identify a previously unrecognized mechanism for the dark-count rate in superconducting nanowire detectors and for the destabilization of the Meissner state in dirty-limit SRF cavities. The analytic weak-bias coefficients C are a rigorous and useful result: they are derived from the Keldysh-Usadel formalism, reduce to the known values of Moor et al. in the perturbative limit (Appendix B), and match earlier numerics. The main scientific gap is that the central instability prediction is inferred from the sign of Im σ at finite frequency, not from a true stability analysis of the driven system; this is the paper's headline claim, so the gap is load-bearing.

major comments (3)

[Section III B, Eq. (44), Figs. 5-8] The central instability claim is not derived from the calculation performed in the paper. The condition Im σ(Jb,ω) < 0 is identified with 'negative superfluid density' and hence instability, but the superfluid density is a static (ω→0) quantity, whereas the predicted instability window spans finite frequencies. Negative Im σ at finite frequency is a familiar feature of resonant linear response and does not by itself imply a growing mode. The paper does not compute poles of the retarded response, does not analyze finite-wavevector fluctuations (the conductivity is computed only for a spatially uniform δq), and does not perform a linearized time-dependent stability analysis of the dc-biased Keldysh-Usadel equations. The paper's own Section V D concedes that the analysis is based on the homogeneous current-carrying solution and does not describe the inhomogeneous state. Because the instability map (Fig. 6) and the kinetic-inductance enhancement near its boundary (Fig. 8(b)) are the headline results, this missing step is load-bearing and must be supplied before the instability claim can be accepted.
[Section II C, Eqs. (25)-(26), with results in Figs. 4-8] All numerical results depend on the ad hoc damping factor Γ, with Γ/Δ0 = 10^{-5} stated as the value used for the numerical solution of the Usadel equation. The paper does not demonstrate that the results are independent of Γ, even though Γ controls the broadening of all resonances. Since the instability domain is defined by zero crossings of Im σ, the boundaries ω1 and ω2, and hence the whole stability map, could in principle shift or disappear for different Γ. The authors should either show convergence with respect to Γ (e.g., compare Γ/Δ0 = 10^{-4} and 10^{-6}) or provide an analytic argument that the zero crossings and the kinetic-inductance peaks are Γ-independent.
[Section IV C, Fig. 8(b)] The prediction of an almost two-order-of-magnitude kinetic-inductance enhancement at ℏω/Δ0 = 1.75 and Jb/Jdp ≃ 0.5 is tied to the proximity of Im σ to zero. The paper interprets this as a stable enhancement because Lk remains positive. However, a vanishingly small Im σ at a fixed frequency also means that the linear-response formula Lk = 1/(ωσ2) is extremely sensitive to any additional dissipation channel or to corrections beyond the present approximation; without a stability analysis of the driven state it is not clear that this large positive Lk is an observable response of the actual system rather than an artifact of the pole-like structure. This concern is directly related to the missing stability analysis; it needs to be resolved before the enhancement claim can be regarded as robust.

minor comments (5)

[Section IV B, Eq. (52)] The analytic evaluation of Ψ is only sketched ('the integral simplifies to −2π...'); including the intermediate steps for the numerator and denominator integrals, and explicitly showing how the cutoff and the BCS coupling constant cancel via the BCS relation, would allow readers to verify Eq. (52).
[Fig. 3] The Higgs-mode feature in Fig. 3 is difficult to see on the scale of the plot; plotting Re σ(2) and Im σ(2) in separate panels normalized by the bias strength s would improve readability.
[Reference list] Reference [61] is a non-technical article about paternity leave; while the acknowledgment of family support is appropriate, it is unusual to include such a citation in the reference list of a physics paper and it may be better placed in the acknowledgments only.
[Notation and copy-editing] The text repeatedly renders 'Jb/Jdp ≳ 0.6' as 'Jb/Jdp /greaterorsimilar 0.6' (e.g., Section III B), indicating a LaTeX-to-text conversion problem that should be fixed in the final version.
[Eq. (24)] The expression for the spectral gap ǫg is stated without citation; since the same formula appears in the Appendix and stems from Maki's work, a reference at Eq. (24) would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the complex-conductivity formula is derived from the Keldysh-Usadel equations without fitting, the weak-bias limit is benchmarked against an independent calculation (Moor et al.), and the instability inference is a physical criterion rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation, Eqs. (40)-(43), is obtained by solving the Keldysh-Usadel equations for a dc-biased dirty superconductor to first order in the ac perturbation. The result is parameter-free in the sense that all coefficients are computed from the equilibrium Green functions Gb and Fb, which are in turn obtained from the Usadel equation and the gap equation, not fitted to the target conductivity. The weak-bias sanity check reproduces Moor et al., an external result, rather than relying on the author's own prior work as the proof. The analytical small-bias coefficients C = 0.409 and C = 0.136 are derived from the Keldysh-Usadel formula together with Maki's equilibrium solution, and the agreement with the author's earlier numerical work and with the phenomenological oscillating/frozen superfluid-density assumptions is presented as a consistency check, not as the input defining the result. The claimed Higgs-induced instability is inferred from the computed sign of Im sigma, using the stated 'well known' criterion that negative Im sigma signifies instability; this is an unproven physical assumption and a correctness risk, but it is not circular because the sign of Im sigma is calculated, not assumed. Self-citations to Refs. [9,10] serve as benchmarks and for context, but they are not load-bearing for the new derivation: the central conductivity formula and the instability map follow from the equations solved in this paper. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained, and no step reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation rests on the standard Keldysh-Usadel framework, Maki's equilibrium solution, BCS cutoff regularization, and the physical criterion that negative imaginary conductivity means instability. The only hand-chosen numerical parameter is the damping factor Γ; it is not fitted to data. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)

Numerical damping factor Γ = 10^-5 Δ0 (chosen by hand for numerical stabilization)
Section II C introduces Γ to stabilize the solution of Eqs. (25)-(26); the paper does not demonstrate that the results are independent of Γ.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Keldysh-Usadel quasiclassical Green's function equations are valid for the dirty-limit superconductor under a dc bias and a weak ac perturbation.
Section II A introduces the Keldysh-Usadel framework as the starting point; it is standard for disordered superconductors but not re-derived here.
domain assumption The equilibrium dc-biased state is a homogeneous superflow with momentum qb, and the ac response is a small linear perturbation around it.
Section II B decomposes q = qb + δq and keeps only first order in δq; near the depairing current, stability of the homogeneous state is exactly what is being tested.
domain assumption A negative imaginary part of the complex conductivity, equivalently a negative superfluid density, implies instability of the homogeneous superflow.
Section III B uses this criterion to conclude instability from Im σ < 0; no derivation or citation is provided in the paper.
standard math The BCS coupling constant G can be eliminated using the high-frequency cutoff relation 1 = G sinh^-1 ω~c.
Used in Section IV B to evaluate the low-frequency Higgs response Ψ = -π/2.
standard math Maki's zero-temperature solution of the thermodynamic Usadel equation gives the correct depairing current and small-bias relation between s and Jb.
Appendix A adopts Maki's results, including Jdp(0) = 0.595 Hc0/λ0, to convert the bias parameter s into the current Jb.
domain assumption The numerical damping factor Γ = 10^-5 Δ0 is small enough not to affect the physical results.
Section II C introduces Γ to stabilize the numerical solution of the Usadel equation; no convergence or Γ-dependence study is shown.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Higgs-mode-induced instability and kinetic inductance in strongly dc-biased dirty-limit superconductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/F2EN3CEU

@misc{pith2026250205914,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Higgs-mode-induced instability and kinetic inductance in strongly dc-biased dirty-limit superconductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/F2EN3CEU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05914}
}

abstract

A perturbative ac field superposed on a dc bias ($J_b$) is known to excite the Higgs mode in superconductors. The dirty limit, where disorder enhances the Higgs resonance, provides an ideal setting for this study and is also relevant to many superconducting devices operating under strong dc biases. In this paper, we derive a general formula for the complex conductivity of disordered superconductors under an arbitrary dc bias using the Keldysh-Usadel theory of nonequilibrium superconductivity. This formula is relatively simple, making it more accessible to a broader research community. Our analysis reveals that in a strongly dc-biased dirty-limit superconductor, the Higgs mode induces an instability in the homogeneous superflow within a specific frequency window, making the high-current-carrying state vulnerable to ac perturbations. This instability, which occurs exclusively in the ${\rm ac} \parallel {\rm dc}$ configuration, leads to a non-monotonic dependence of kinetic inductance on frequency and bias strength. By carefully tuning the dc bias and the frequency of the ac perturbation, the kinetic inductance can be enhanced by nearly two orders of magnitude. In the weak dc bias regime, our formula recovers the well-known quadratic dependence, $L_k \propto 1+ C(J_b/J_{\rm dp})^2$, with coefficients $C=0.409$ for ${\rm ac} \parallel {\rm dc}$ and $C=0.136$ for ${\rm ac} \perp {\rm dc}$, where $J_{\rm dp}$ is the equilibrium depairing current density. These findings establish a robust theoretical framework for dc-biased superconducting systems and suggest that Higgs mode physics could be exploited in the design and optimization of superconducting detectors. Moreover, they may lead to a yet-to-be-explored detector concept based on Higgs mode physics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.05914 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Equilibrium properties of a superconducting film un [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Sanity check: manifestation of the Higgs mode in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (6 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Absence of Higgs resonance in the complex con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: These features become more pronounced as the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Nonperturbative Higgs mode manifestation in the com [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Higgs-induced instability domain in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. Bias dc dependence of the kinetic inductance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Frequency dependence of the kinetic inductance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

[1]

Zmuidzinas, Superconducting Microresonators: Physics and Applications, Annu

J. Zmuidzinas, Superconducting Microresonators: Physics and Applications, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 3, 169 (2012)

2012
[2]

In general, as illustrated in Fig

(52) The next step is to express s/∆ 0 in terms of Jb/Jdp. In general, as illustrated in Fig. 2(a), Jb/Jdp exhibits a nonlinear dependence on s/∆ 0 = (qb/qξ)2. However, in the small bias regime ( Jb/Jdp ≪ 1), this relationship simpliﬁes to a linear form: Jb/Jdp =kqb/qξ, which leads tos/∆ 0 =k−2(Jb/Jdp)2. While the slope k(T ) generally needs to be determi...

work page
[3]

M. R. Vissers, R. P. Erickson, H.-S. Ku, L. Vale, X. Wu, G. C. Hilton;, and D. P. Pappas, Low-noise kinetic induc- tance traveling-wave ampliﬁer using three-wave mixing, Appl. Phys. Lett. 108, 012601 (2016)

work page 2016
[4]

Shishido, S

H. Shishido, S. Miyajima, Y. Narukami, K. Oikawa, M. Harada, T. Oku, M. Arai, M. Hidaka, A. Fujimaki, and T. Ishida, Neutron detection using a current biased ki- netic inductance detector, Appl. Phys. Lett. 107, 232601 (2015)

work page 2015
[5]

I. E. Zadeh, J. Chang, J. W. N. Los; S. Gyger, A. W. Elshaari, S. Steinhauer, S. N. Dorenbos, and V. Zwiller, Superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors: A perspective on evolution, state-of-the-art, future devel op- ments, and applications, Appl. Phys. Lett. 118, 190502 (2021)

work page 2021
[6]

F. Ando, Y. Miyasaka, T. Li, J. Ishizuka, T. Arakawa, Y. Shiota, T. Moriyama, Y. Yanase, and T. Ono, Obser- vation of superconducting diode eﬀect Nature 584, 373 (2020)

work page 2020
[7]

Gurevich, Theory of RF superconductivity for res- onant cavities, Supercond

A. Gurevich, Theory of RF superconductivity for res- onant cavities, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 30, 034004 (2017)

work page 2017
[8]

A. Moor, A. F. Volkov, and K. B. Efetov, Amplitude 14 Higgs Mode and Admittance in Superconductors with a Moving Condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 047001 (2017)

work page 2017

Show all 62 references

[9]

Nakamura, Y

S. Nakamura, Y. Iida, Y. Murotani, R. Matsunaga, H. Terai, and R. Shimano, Infrared Activation of the Higgs Mode by Supercurrent Injection in Superconduct- ing NbN, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 257001 (2019)

2019
[10]

Jujo, Surface Resistance and Amplitude Mode under Uniform and Static External Field in Conventional Su- perconductors, J

T. Jujo, Surface Resistance and Amplitude Mode under Uniform and Static External Field in Conventional Su- perconductors, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 91, 074711 (2022)

2022
[11]

T. Kubo, Signiﬁcant contributions of the Higgs mode and impurity-scattering self-energy corrections to the low- frequency complex conductivity in dc-biased supercon- ducting devices, Physical Review Applied 22, 044042 (2024)

2024
[12]

P. W. Anderson, Random-Phase Approximation in the Theory of Superconductivity, Phys. Rev. 112, 1900 (1958)

1958
[13]

A. F. Volkov and S. M. Kogan, Collisionless relaxation of the energy gap in superconductors, Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics 38, 1018 (1974)

1974
[14]

Shimano and N

R. Shimano and N. Tsuji, Higgs mode in superconduc- tors, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 11, 103 (2020)

2020
[15]

Tsuji, I

N. Tsuji, I. Danshita, S. Tsuchiya, Higgs and Nambu- Goldstone modes in condensed matter physics, in Ency- clopedia of Condensed Matter Physics (Second Edition) , edited by Tapash Chakraborty (Academic Press, Canm- bridge, Massachusetts, 2024), p. 174

2024
[16]

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− xTixN Induced by Ter- ahertz Pulse Excitation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 057002 (2013)

2013
[17]

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 345, 1145 (2014)

2014
[18]

Tsuji, and H

N. Tsuji, and H. Aoki, Theory of Anderson pseudo spin resonance with Higgs mode in superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 92, 064508 (2015)

2015
[19]

Jujo, Quasiclassical Theory on Third-Harmonic Gen- eration in Conventional Superconductors with Paramag- netic Impurities, J

T. Jujo, Quasiclassical Theory on Third-Harmonic Gen- eration in Conventional Superconductors with Paramag- netic Impurities, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 87, 024704 (2018)

2018
[20]

Silaev, Nonlinear electromagnetic response and Hig gs- mode excitation in BCS superconductors with impurities, Phys

M. Silaev, Nonlinear electromagnetic response and Hig gs- mode excitation in BCS superconductors with impurities, Phys. Rev. B 99, 224511 (2019)

2019
[21]

W. V. Budzinski, M. P. Garfunkel, and R. W. Markley, Magnetic ﬁeld dependence of the surface resistance of pure and impure superconducting aluminum at photon energies near the energy gap, Phys. Rev. B 7, 1001 (1973)

1973
[22]

T. Kubo, Superﬂuid ﬂow in disordered superconductors with Dynes pair-breaking scattering: Depairing current, kinetic inductance, and superheating ﬁeld, Physical Re- view Research 2, 033203 (2020)

2020
[23]

Kubo, Erratum: Superﬂuid ﬂow in disordered super- conductors with Dynes pair-breaking scattering: Depair- ing current, kinetic inductance, and superheating ﬁeld [Phys

T. Kubo, Erratum: Superﬂuid ﬂow in disordered super- conductors with Dynes pair-breaking scattering: Depair- ing current, kinetic inductance, and superheating ﬁeld [Phys. Rev. Research 2, 033203 (2020)], Physical Review Research 6, 039002 (2024)

2020
[24]

S. M. Anlage, H. J. Snortland, and M. R. Beasley, A current controlled variable delay superconducting trans- mission line, IEEE Trans. Magn. 25, 1388 (1989)

1989
[25]

J. R. Clem and V. G. Kogan, Kinetic impedance and de- pairing in thin and narrow superconducting ﬁlms, Phys. Rev. B 86, 174521 (2012)

2012
[26]

N. B. Kopnin, Theory of Nonequilibrium Superconductiv- ity (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001)

2001
[27]

Rammer and H

J. Rammer and H. Smith, Quantum ﬁeld-theoretical methods in transport theory of metals, Rev. Mod. Phys. 58, 323 (1986)

1986
[28]

J. A. Sauls, Theory of disordered superconductors with application to nonlinear current response, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022, 033I03 (2022)

2022
[29]

Maki, On persistent currents in a superconducting alloy I, Prog

K. Maki, On persistent currents in a superconducting alloy I, Prog. Theor. Phys. 29, 10 (1963)

1963
[30]

Maki, Gapless superconductivity, in Superconductiv- ity, edited by R

K. Maki, Gapless superconductivity, in Superconductiv- ity, edited by R. D. Parks (Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1969), vol. 2, p. 1035

1969
[31]

Yu Kupriyanov and V

M. Yu Kupriyanov and V. F. Lukichev, Temperature dependence of pair-breaking current in superconductors, Fizika Nizkikh Temperatur 6, 445 (1980)

1980
[32]

Gor’kov and G

L. Gor’kov and G. Eliashberg, Generalization of the Ginzburg-Landau equations for non-stationary problems in the case of alloys with paramagnetic impurities, Sov. Phys. JETP 27, 328 (1968)

1968
[33]

Eliashberg, Inelastic Electron Collisions and None qui- librium Stationary States in Superconductors, Sov

G. Eliashberg, Inelastic Electron Collisions and None qui- librium Stationary States in Superconductors, Sov. Phys. JETP 34, 668 (1972)

1972
[34]

S. B. Nam, Theory of Electromagnetic Properties of Su- perconducting and Normal Systems. I, Phys. Rev. 156, 470 (1967)

1967
[35]

Gurevich and T

A. Gurevich and T. Kubo, Surface impedance and op- timum surface resistance of a superconductor with an imperfect surface, Phys. Rev. B 96, 184515 (2017)

2017
[36]

Kubo, Eﬀects of Nonmagnetic Impurities and Subgap States on the Kinetic Inductance, Complex Conductivity, Quality Factor, and Depairing Current Density, Phys

T. Kubo, Eﬀects of Nonmagnetic Impurities and Subgap States on the Kinetic Inductance, Complex Conductivity, Quality Factor, and Depairing Current Density, Phys. Rev. Applied 17, 014018 (2022)

2022
[37]

Gurevich, Reduction of Dissipative Nonlinear Con- ductivity of Superconductors by Static and Microwave Magnetic Fields, Phys

A. Gurevich, Reduction of Dissipative Nonlinear Con- ductivity of Superconductors by Static and Microwave Magnetic Fields, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 087001 (2014)

2014
[38]

Kubo, Weak-ﬁeld dissipative conductivity of a dirty superconductor with Dynes subgap states under a dc bias current up to the depairing current density, Phys

T. Kubo, Weak-ﬁeld dissipative conductivity of a dirty superconductor with Dynes subgap states under a dc bias current up to the depairing current density, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 013302 (2020)

2020
[39]

S. Zhao, S. Withington, D. J. Goldie, and C. N. Thomas, Suppressed-gap millimetre wave kinetic inductance de- tectors using DC-bias current, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 53, 345301 (2020)

2020
[40]

Grankin, V

A. Grankin, V. Galitski, V. Oganesyan, Negative super- ﬂuid density and spatial instabilities in driven supercon- ductors, arXiv:2501.08216

arXiv
[41]

K. Wang, R. Boyack, and K. Levin, The Higgs- Amplitude mode in the optical conductivity in the pres- ence of a supercurrent: Gauge invariant forumulation, arXiv:2411.18781

arXiv
[42]

Enpuku, H

K. Enpuku, H. Moritaka, H. Inokuchi, T. Kisu, and M. Takeo Current-Dependent Kinetic Inductance of Super- conducting YBaCuO Thin Films, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 34, L675 (1995)

1995
[43]

A. J. Annunziata, D. F. Santavicca, L. Frunzio, G. Cate- lani, M. J. Rooks, A. Frydman, and D. E. Prober, Tunable superconducting nanoinductors, Nanotechnol- ogy 21, 445202 (2010)

2010
[44]

M. R. Vissers; J. Hubmayr, M. Sandberg, S. Chaudhuri, C. Bockstiegel, and J. Gao, Frequency-tunable super- 15 conducting resonators via nonlinear kinetic inductance, Appl. Phys. Lett. 107, 062601 (2015)

2015
[45]

Frasca, B

S. Frasca, B. Korzh, M. Colangelo, D. Zhu, A. E. Lita, J. P. Allmaras, E. E. Wollman, V. B. Verma, A. E. Dane, E. Ramirez, A. D. Beyer, S. W. Nam, A. G. Kozorezov, M. D. Shaw, and K. K. Berggren, Determining the depair- ing current in superconducting nanowire single-photon det...

2019
[46]

Makita, C

J. Makita, C. Sundahl, G. Ciovati, C. B. Eom, and A. Gurevich, Nonlinear Meissner eﬀect in Nb 3Sn coplanar resonators, Phys. Rev. Research 4, 013156 (2022)

2022
[47]

X. Dai, X. Liu, Q. He, Y. Chen, Z. Mai, Z. Shi, W. Guo, Y. Wang, L. F. Wei, M. R. Vissers, and J. Gao New method for ﬁtting complex resonance curve to study non- linear superconducting resonators, Supercond. Sci. Tech- nol. 36, 015003 (2023)

2023
[48]

Greenﬁeld, C

J. Greenﬁeld, C. Bell, F. Faramarzi, C. Kim, R. B. Thakur, A. Wandui, C. Frez, P. Mauskopf, and D. Cun- nane, Kinetic inductance and non-linearity of MgB 2 ﬁlms at 4K, Appl. Phys. Lett. 126, 022602 (2025)

2025
[49]

L. N. Bulaevskii, Matthias J. Graf, and V. G. Kogan, Vortex-assisted photon counts and their magnetic ﬁeld dependence in single-photon superconducting detectors, Phys. Rev. B 85, 014505 (2012)

2012
[50]

Yamashita, S

T. Yamashita, S. Miki, K. Makise, W. Qiu, H. Terai, M. Fujiwara, M. Sasaki, and Z. Wang, Origin of intrinsic dark count in superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors, Appl. Phys. Lett. 99, 161105 (2011)

2011
[51]

Catelani and J

G. Catelani and J. P. Sethna, Temperature dependence of the superheating ﬁeld for superconductors in the high- κ London limit, Phys. Rev. B 78, 224509 (2008)

2008
[52]

M. K. Transtrum1, G. Catelani, and J. P. Sethna Super- heating ﬁeld of superconductors within Ginzburg-Landau theory, Phys. Rev. B 83, 094505 (2011)

2011
[53]

Pei-Jen Lin and A

F. Pei-Jen Lin and A. Gurevich, Eﬀect of impurities on the superheating ﬁeld of type-II superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 85, 054513 (2012)

2012
[54]

T. Kubo, Multilayer coating for higher accelerating ﬁe lds in superconducting radio-frequency cavities: a review of theoretical aspects, Superconductor Science and Technol- ogy 30, 023001 (2017)

2017
[55]

Ngampruetikorn and J

V. Ngampruetikorn and J. A. Sauls, Eﬀect of inhomo- geneous surface disorder on the superheating ﬁeld of su- perconducting RF cavities Physical Review Research 1, 012015 (2019)

2019
[56]

Kubo, Superheating ﬁelds of semi-inﬁnite supercon- ductors and layered superconductors in the diﬀusive limit: structural optimization based on the microscopic theory, Supercond

T. Kubo, Superheating ﬁelds of semi-inﬁnite supercon- ductors and layered superconductors in the diﬀusive limit: structural optimization based on the microscopic theory, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 34, 045006 (2021)

2021
[57]

Kubo, How high a ﬁeld has been and can be achieved in superconducting bulk niobium cavities: the role of RRR, Jpn

T. Kubo, How high a ﬁeld has been and can be achieved in superconducting bulk niobium cavities: the role of RRR, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 64, 018002 (2025)

2025
[58]

D. Y. Vodolazov and F. M. Peeters, Superconducting rectiﬁer based on the asymmetric surface barrier eﬀect, Phys. Rev. B 72, 172508 (2005)

2005
[59]

D. Suri, A. Kamra, T. N. G. Meier, M. Kro- nseder, W.Belzig, C. H. Back, and C. Strunk, Non- reciprocity of vortex-limited critical current in conven- tional supercon-ducting micro-bridges, Appl. Phys. Lett. 121, 102601(2022)

2022
[60]

Kubo, Tuning Critical Field, Critical Current, and Diode Eﬀect of Narrow Thin-Film Superconduc- tors Through Engineering Inhomogeneous Pearl Length, Phys

T. Kubo, Tuning Critical Field, Critical Current, and Diode Eﬀect of Narrow Thin-Film Superconduc- tors Through Engineering Inhomogeneous Pearl Length, Phys. Rev. Applied 20, 034033 (2023)

2023
[61]

Y. Hou, F. Nichele, H. Chi, A. Lodesani, Y. Wu, M. F. Ritter, D. Z. Haxell, M. Davydova, S. Ilic et al. Ubiq- uitous Superconducting Diode Eﬀect in Superconductor Thin Films, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 027001 (2023)

2023
[62]

T. Kubo, An Encouraging of Paternity Leave: A Physi- cist Who Has Become a Stay-at-Home Dad in New York, KASOKUKI, 20, 50 (2023) [Journal of the Particle Ac- celerator Society of Japan 20, 50 (2023)]

2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Zmuidzinas, Superconducting Microresonators: Physics and Applications, Annu

J. Zmuidzinas, Superconducting Microresonators: Physics and Applications, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 3, 169 (2012)

2012

[2] [2]

In general, as illustrated in Fig

(52) The next step is to express s/∆ 0 in terms of Jb/Jdp. In general, as illustrated in Fig. 2(a), Jb/Jdp exhibits a nonlinear dependence on s/∆ 0 = (qb/qξ)2. However, in the small bias regime ( Jb/Jdp ≪ 1), this relationship simpliﬁes to a linear form: Jb/Jdp =kqb/qξ, which leads tos/∆ 0 =k−2(Jb/Jdp)2. While the slope k(T ) generally needs to be determi...

work page

[3] [3]

M. R. Vissers, R. P. Erickson, H.-S. Ku, L. Vale, X. Wu, G. C. Hilton;, and D. P. Pappas, Low-noise kinetic induc- tance traveling-wave ampliﬁer using three-wave mixing, Appl. Phys. Lett. 108, 012601 (2016)

work page 2016

[4] [4]

Shishido, S

H. Shishido, S. Miyajima, Y. Narukami, K. Oikawa, M. Harada, T. Oku, M. Arai, M. Hidaka, A. Fujimaki, and T. Ishida, Neutron detection using a current biased ki- netic inductance detector, Appl. Phys. Lett. 107, 232601 (2015)

work page 2015

[5] [5]

I. E. Zadeh, J. Chang, J. W. N. Los; S. Gyger, A. W. Elshaari, S. Steinhauer, S. N. Dorenbos, and V. Zwiller, Superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors: A perspective on evolution, state-of-the-art, future devel op- ments, and applications, Appl. Phys. Lett. 118, 190502 (2021)

work page 2021

[6] [6]

F. Ando, Y. Miyasaka, T. Li, J. Ishizuka, T. Arakawa, Y. Shiota, T. Moriyama, Y. Yanase, and T. Ono, Obser- vation of superconducting diode eﬀect Nature 584, 373 (2020)

work page 2020

[7] [7]

Gurevich, Theory of RF superconductivity for res- onant cavities, Supercond

A. Gurevich, Theory of RF superconductivity for res- onant cavities, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 30, 034004 (2017)

work page 2017

[8] [8]

A. Moor, A. F. Volkov, and K. B. Efetov, Amplitude 14 Higgs Mode and Admittance in Superconductors with a Moving Condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 047001 (2017)

work page 2017