diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'mixed_domain')
17 files changed, 425 insertions, 0 deletions
| diff --git a/mixed_domain/2D delays.pdf b/mixed_domain/2D delays.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a8c3fe1 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/2D delays.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/2D frequences at -4.pdf b/mixed_domain/2D frequences at -4.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2663053 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/2D frequences at -4.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/2D frequences at zero.pdf b/mixed_domain/2D frequences at zero.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..fdb5426 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/2D frequences at zero.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/3PEPS.pdf b/mixed_domain/3PEPS.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..dae9d99 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/3PEPS.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/WMELs.pdf b/mixed_domain/WMELs.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..74d83ec --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/WMELs.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/chapter.tex b/mixed_domain/chapter.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4d3ba1c --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/chapter.tex @@ -0,0 +1,425 @@ +\chapter{Disentangling material and instrument response}
 +
 +Ultrafast spectroscopy is often collected in the mixed frequency/time domain, where pulse durations
 +are similar to system dephasing times.  %
 +In these experiments, expectations derived from the familiar driven and impulsive limits are not
 +valid.  %
 +This work simulates the mixed-domain Four Wave Mixing response of a model system to develop
 +expectations for this more complex field-matter interaction.  %
 +We explore frequency and delay axes.  %
 +We show that these line shapes are exquisitely sensitive to excitation pulse widths and delays.  %
 +Near pulse overlap, the excitation pulses induce correlations which resemble signatures of dynamic
 +inhomogeneity.  %
 +We describe these line shapes using an intuitive picture that connects to familiar field-matter
 +expressions.  %
 +We develop strategies for distinguishing pulse-induced correlations from true system
 +inhomogeneity.  %
 +These simulations provide a foundation for interpretation of ultrafast experiments in the mixed
 +domain.  %
 +
 +\section{Introduction}
 +
 +Ultrafast spectroscopy is based on using nonlinear interactions, created by multiple ultrashort
 +($10^{-9}-10^{-15}$s) pulses, to resolve spectral information on timescales as short as the pulses
 +themselves.\cite{Rentzepis1970,Mukamel2000}  % 
 +The ultrafast specta can be collected in the time domain or the frequency domain.\cite{Park1998}  %
 +
 +Time-domain methods scan the pulse delays to resolve the free induction decay
 +(FID).\cite{Gallagher1998}   %
 +The Fourier Transform of the FID gives the ultrafast spectrum.  %
 +Ideally, these experiments are performed in the impulsive limit where FID dominates the
 +measurement.  % 
 +FID occurs at the frequency of the transition that has been excited by a well-defined, time-ordered
 +sequence of pulses.  % 
 +Time-domain methods are compromised when the dynamics occur on faster time scales than the
 +ultrafast excitation pulses.  %
 +As the pulses temporally overlap, FID from other pulse time-orderings and emission driven by the
 +excitation pulses both become important.  % 
 +These factors are responsible for the complex ``coherent artifacts'' that are often ignored in
 +pump-probe and related methods.\cite{Lebedev2007, Vardeny1981, Joffre1988, Pollard1992}  % 
 +Dynamics faster than the pulse envelopes are best measured using line shapes in frequency domain
 +methods.  %
 +
 +Frequency-domain methods scan pulse frequencies to resolve the ultrafast spectrum
 +directly.\cite{Druet1979,Oudar1980}  % 
 +Ideally, these experiments are performed in the driven limit where the steady state dominates the
 +measurement.  %
 +In the driven limit, all time-orderings of the pulse interactions are equally important and FID
 +decay is negligible.  %
 +The output signal is driven at the excitation pulse frequencies during the excitation pulse
 +width.  %
 +Frequency-domain methods are compromised when the spectral line shape is narrower than the
 +frequency bandwidth of the excitation pulses.  % 
 +Dynamics that are slower than the pulse envelopes can be measured in the time domain by resolving
 +the phase oscillations of the output signal during the entire FID decay.  %
 +
 +There is also the hybrid mixed-time/frequency-domain approach, where pulse delays and pulse
 +frequencies are both scanned to measure the system response.  %
 +This approach is uniquely suited for experiments where the dephasing time is comparable to the
 +pulse durations, so that neither frequency-domain nor time-domain approaches excel on their
 +own.\cite{Oudar1980,Wright1997a,Wright1991}  %
 +In this regime, both FID and driven processes are important.\cite{Pakoulev2006}  %
 +Their relative importance depends on pulse frequencies and delays.  %
 +Extracting the correct spectrum from the measurement then requires a more complex analysis that
 +explicitly treats the excitation pulses and the different
 +time-orderings.\cite{Pakoulev2007,Kohler2014,Gelin2009a}   %
 +Despite these complications, mixed-domain methods have a practical advantage: the dual frequency-
 +and delay-scanning capabilities allow these methods to address a wide variety of dephasing
 +rates.  %
 +
 +The relative importance of FID and driven processes and the changing importance of different
 +coherence pathways are important factors for understanding spectral features in all ultrafast
 +methods.  %
 +These methods include partially-coherent methods involving intermediate populations such as
 +pump-probe,\cite{Hamm2000} transient grating,\cite{Salcedo1978,Fourkas1992,Fourkas1992a} transient
 +absorption/reflection,\cite{Aubock2012,Bakker2002} photon
 +echo,\cite{DeBoeij1996,Patterson1984,Tokmakoff1995} two dimensional-infrared spectroscopy
 +(2D-IR),\cite{Hamm1999,Asplund2000,Zanni2001} 2D-electronic spectroscopy
 +(2D-ES),\cite{Hybl2001a,Brixner2004} and three pulse photon echo peak shift
 +(3PEPS)\cite{Emde1998,DeBoeij1996,DeBoeij1995,Cho1992,Passino1997} spectroscopies.  %
 +These methods also include fully-coherent methods involving only coherences such as Stimulated
 +Raman Spectroscopy (SRS),\cite{Yoon2005,McCamant2005} Doubly Vibrationally Enhanced
 +(DOVE),\cite{Zhao1999,Zhao1999a,Zhao2000,Meyer2003,Donaldson2007,Donaldson2008,Fournier2008} Triply
 +Resonant Sum Frequency (TRSF),\cite{Boyle2013a,Boyle2013,Boyle2014} Sum Frequency Generation
 +(SFG)\cite{Lagutchev2007}, Coherent Anti-Stokes Raman Spectroscopy
 +(CARS)\cite{Carlson1990b,Carlson1990a,Carlson1991} and other coherent Raman
 +methods\cite{Steehler1985}.  %
 +
 +This paper focuses on understanding the nature of the spectral changes that occur in Coherent
 +Multidimensional Spectroscopy (CMDS) as experiments transition between the two limits of frequency-
 +and time-domain methods.  %
 +CMDS is a family of spectroscopies that use multiple delay and/or frequency axes to extract
 +homogeneous and inhomogeneous broadening, as well as detailed information about spectral diffusion
 +and chemical changes.\cite{Kwac2003,Wright2016}  % 
 +For time-domain CMDS (2D-IR, 2D-ES), the complications that occur when the impulsive approximation
 +does not strictly hold has only recently been addressed.\cite{Erlik2017,Smallwood2016}  %
 +
 +Frequency-domain CMDS methods, referred to herein as multi-resonant CMDS (MR-CMDS), have similar
 +capabilities for measuring homogeneous and inhomogeneous broadening.  %
 +Although these experiments are typically described in the driven
 +limit,\cite{Gallagher1998,Fourkas1992,Fourkas1992a} many of the experiments involve pulse widths
 +that are comparable to the widths of the
 +system.\cite{Meyer2003,Donaldson2007,Pakoulev2009,Zhao1999,Czech2015,Kohler2014}  % 
 +MR-CMDS then becomes a mixed-domain experiment whereby resonances are characterized with marginal
 +resolution in both frequency and time.  %
 +For example, DOVE spectroscopy involves three different pathways\cite{Wright2003} whose relative
 +importance depends on the relative importance of FID and driven responses.\cite{Donaldson2010}  %
 +In the driven limit, the DOVE line shape depends on the difference between the first two pulse
 +frequencies so the line shape has a diagonal character that mimics the effects of inhomogeneous
 +broadening.  % 
 +In the FID limit where the coherence frequencies are defined instead by the transition, the
 +diagonal character is lost.  %  
 +Understanding these effects is crucial for interpreting experiments, yet these effects have not
 +been characterized for MR-CMDS.  %
 +
 +This work considers the third-order MR-CMDS response of a 3-level model system using three
 +ultrafast excitation beams with the commonly used four-wave mixing (FWM) phase-matching condition,
 +$\vec{k}_\text{out} = \vec{k}_1 - \vec{k}_2 + \vec{k}_{2'}$.  % 
 +Here, the subscripts represent the excitation pulse frequencies, $\omega_1$ and $\omega_2 =
 +\omega_{2'}$.  %
 +These experimental conditions were recently used to explore line shapes of excitonic
 +systems,\cite{Kohler2014,Czech2015} and have been developed on vibrational states as
 +well.\cite{Meyer2004}  %
 +Although MR-CMDS forms the context of this model, the treatment is quite general because the phase
 +matching condition can describe any of the spectroscopies mentioned above with the exception of SFG
 +and TRSF, for which the model can be easily extended.  %
 +We numerically simulate the MR-CMDS response with pulse durations at, above, and below the system
 +coherence time.  %
 +To highlight the role of pulse effects, we build an interpretation of the full MR-CMDS response by
 +first showing how finite pulses affect the evolution of a coherence, and then how finite pulses
 +affect an isolated third-order pathway.  %
 +When considering the full MR-CMDS response, we show that spectral features change dramatically as a
 +function of delay, even for a homogeneous system with elementary dynamics.  %
 +Importantly, the line shape can exhibit correlations that mimic inhomogeneity, and the temporal
 +evolution of this line shape can mimic spectral diffusion.  %
 +We identify key signatures that can help differentiate true inhomogeneity and spectral diffusion
 +from these measurement artifacts.  %
 +
 +\section{Theory}
 +
 +\begin{figure}
 +  \centering
 +	\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{"mixed_domain/WMELs"}
 +	\caption{
 +		The sixteen triply-resonant Liouville pathways for the third-order response of the system used
 +    here.  Time flows from left to right.  Each excitation is labeled by the pulse stimulating the
 +    transition; excitatons with $\omega_1$ are yellow, excitations with $\omega_2=\omega_{2'}$ are
 +    purple, and the final emission is gray.
 +	}
 +	\label{fig:WMELs}
 +\end{figure}
 +
 +We consider a simple three-level system (states $n=0,1,2$) that highlights the multidimensional
 +line shape changes resulting from choices of the relative dephasing and detuning of the system and
 +the temporal and spectral widths of the excitation pulses.  %  
 +For simplicity, we will ignore population relaxation effects:  $\Gamma_{11}=\Gamma_{00}=0$.  %
 +
 +The electric field pulses, $\left\{E_l \right\}$, are given by:
 +\begin{equation}\label{eq:E_l}
 +E_l(t; \omega_l, \tau_l, \vec{k}_l \cdot z) = \frac{1}{2}\left[c_l(t-\tau_l)e^{i\vec{k}_l\cdot z}e^{-i\omega_l(t-\tau_l)} + c.c. \right],
 +\end{equation}
 +where $\omega_l$ is the field carrier frequency, $\vec{k}_l$ is the wavevector, $\tau_l$ is the
 +pulse delay, and $c_l$ is a slowly varying envelope.  %
 +In this work, we assume normalized (real-valued) Gaussian envelopes:  %
 +\begin{equation}
 +c_l(t) = \frac{1}{\Delta_t}\sqrt{\frac{2\ln 2}{2\pi}} \exp\left(-\ln 2 \left[\frac{t}{\Delta_t}\right]^2\right),
 +\end{equation}
 +where $\Delta_t$ is the temporal FWHM of the envelope intensity.  %
 +We neglect non-linear phase effects such as chirp so the FWHM of the frequency bandwidth is
 +transform limited:  $\Delta_{\omega}\Delta_t=4 \ln 2 \approx 2.77$, where $\Delta_{\omega}$ is the
 +spectral FWHM (intensity scale).  %
 +
 +
 +The Liouville-von Neumann Equation propagates the density matrix, $\bm{\rho}$:
 +\begin{equation}\label{eq:LVN}
 +\frac{d\bm{\rho}}{dt} = -\frac{i}{\hbar}\left[\bm{H_0} + \bm{\mu}\cdot \sum_{l=1,2,2^\prime} E_l(t), \bm{{\rho}}\right] + \bm{\Gamma \rho}.
 +\end{equation}
 +Here $\bm{H_0}$ is the time-independent Hamiltonian, $\bm{\mu}$ is the dipole superoperator, and
 +$\bm{\Gamma}$ contains the pure dephasing rate of the system.  %
 +We perform the standard perturbative expansion of Equation \ref{eq:LVN} to third order in the
 +electric field
 +interaction\cite{mukamel1995principles,Yee1978,Oudar1980,Armstrong1962,Schweigert2008} and restrict
 +ourselves only to the terms that have the correct spatial wave vector
 +$\vec{k}_{\text{out}}=\vec{k}_1-\vec{k}_2+\vec{k}_{2^\prime}$.  %
 +This approximation narrows the scope to sets of three interactions, one from each field, that
 +result in the correct spatial dependence.  %
 +The set of three interactions have $3!=6$ unique time-ordered sequences, and each time-ordering
 +produces either two or three unique system-field interactions for our system, for a total of
 +sixteen unique system-field interaction sequences, or Liouville pathways, to consider.  %
 +Fig. \ref{fig:WMELs} shows these sixteen pathways as Wave Mixing Energy Level (WMEL)
 +diagrams\cite{Lee1985}.  %
 +
 +We first focus on a single interaction in these sequences, where an excitation pulse, $x$, forms
 +$\rho_{ij}$ from $\rho_{ik}$ or $\rho_{kj}$.  %
 +For brevity, we use $\hbar=1$ and abbreviate the initial and final density matrix elements as
 +$\rho_i$ and $\rho_f$, respectively.  %
 +Using the natural frequency rotating frame, $\tilde{\rho}_{ij}=\rho_{ij} e^{-i\omega_{ij}t}$, the formation of $\rho_f$ using pulse $x$ is written as
 +\begin{equation}\label{eq:rho_f}
 +\begin{split}
 +\frac{d\tilde{\rho}_f}{dt} =& -\Gamma_f\tilde{\rho}_f \\ 
 +&+ \frac{i}{2} \lambda_f \mu_f c_x(t-\tau_x)e^{i\kappa_f\left(\vec{k}_x\cdot z + \omega_x \tau_x \right)}e^{i\kappa_f\Omega_{fx}t}\tilde{\rho}_i(t),
 +\end{split}
 +\end{equation}
 +where $\Omega_{fx}=\kappa_f^{-1}\omega_f - \omega_x (=\left|\omega_f\right| - \omega_x)$ is the
 +detuning, $\omega_f$ is the transition frequency of the $i^{th}$ transition, $\mu_f$ is the
 +transition dipole, and $\Gamma_f$ is the dephasing/relaxation rate for $\rho_f$.  %
 +The $\lambda_f$ and $\kappa_f$ parameters describe the phases of the interaction:  $\lambda_f=+1$
 +for ket-side transitions and -1 for bra-side transitions, and $\kappa_f$ depends on whether
 +$\rho_f$ is formed via absorption ($\kappa_f= \lambda_f$) or emission
 +($\kappa_f=-\lambda_f$).\footnote{$\kappa_f$ also has a direct relationship to the phase matching
 +  relationship: for transitions with $E_2$, $\kappa_f=1$, and for $E_1$ or $E_{2^\prime}$,
 +  $\kappa_f=-1$.}  %
 +In the following equations we neglect spatial dependence ($z=0$).  %
 +
 +Equation \ref{eq:rho_f} forms the basis for our simulations.  %
 +It provides a general expression for arbitrary values of the dephasing rate and excitation pulse
 +bandwidth.  %
 +The integral solution is
 +\begin{equation}\label{eq:rho_f_int}
 +\begin{split}
 +\tilde{\rho}_f(t) =& \frac{i}{2}\lambda_f \mu_f e^{i\kappa_f \omega_x \tau_x} e^{i\kappa_f \Omega_{fx} t} \\
 +&\times \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} c_x(t-u-\tau_x)\tilde{\rho}_i(t-u)\Theta(u) \\
 +& \qquad \quad \ \ \times e^{-\left(\Gamma_f+i\kappa_f\Omega_{fx}\right)u}du, 
 +\end{split}
 +\end{equation}
 +where $\Theta$ is the Heaviside step function.  %
 +Equation \ref{eq:rho_f_int} becomes the steady state limit expression when $\Delta_t \left|\Gamma_f
 +  + i \kappa_f \Omega_{fx}\right| \gg 1$, and the impulsive limit expression results when $\Delta_t
 +\left|\Gamma_f + i \kappa_f \Omega_{fx}\right| \ll 1$.  %
 +Both limits are important for understanding the multidimensional line shape changes discussed in
 +this paper.  %
 +The steady state and impulsive limits of Equation \ref{eq:rho_f_int} are discussed in Appendix
 +\ref{sec:cw_imp}.  %
 +
 +\begin{figure*}
 +	\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{"mixed_domain/simulation overview"}
 +	\caption{
 +		Overview of the MR-CMDS simulation. 
 +		(a) The temporal profile of a coherence under pulsed excitation depends on how quickly the
 +    coherence dephases.  In all subsequent panes, the relative dephasing rate is kept constant at
 +    $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t=1$.
 +		(b) Simulated evolution of the density matrix elements of a third-order Liouville pathway
 +    $V\gamma$ under fully resonant excitation. Pulses can be labeled both by their time of arrival
 +    ($x$,$y$,$z$) and by the lab lasers used to stimulate the transitions ($2$,$2^\prime$,$1$). The
 +    final coherence (teal) creates the output electric field.   
 +		(c) The frequency profile of the output electric field is filtered by a monochromator gating
 +    function, $M(\omega)$, and the passed components (shaded) are measured.   
 +		(d-f) Signal is viewed  against two laser parameters, either as 2D delay (d), mixed
 +    delay-frequency (e), or 2D frequency plots (f).  The six time-orderings are labeled in (d) to
 +    help introduce our delay convention.  
 +	}
 +	\label{fig:overview}
 +\end{figure*}
 +
 +Fig. \ref{fig:overview} gives an overview of the simulations done in this work.  %
 +Fig. \ref{fig:overview}a shows an excitation pulse (gray-shaded) and examples of a coherent
 +transient for three different dephasing rates.  %
 +The color bindings to dephasing rates introduced in Fig. \ref{fig:overview}a will be used
 +consistently throughout this work.  %
 +Our simulations use systems with dephasing rates quantified relative to the pulse duration:
 +$\Gamma_{10} \Delta_t = 0.5, 1$, or $2$.  %
 +The temporal axes are normalized to the pulse duration, $\Delta_t$.  The $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t=2$
 +transient is mostly driven by the excitation pulse while $\Gamma_{10} \Delta_t = 0.5$ has a
 +substantial free induction decay (FID) component at late times.  %
 +Fig. \ref{fig:overview}b shows a pulse sequence (pulses are shaded orange and pink) and the
 +resulting system evolution of pathway $V\gamma$ ($00 \xrightarrow{2} 01 \xrightarrow{2^\prime} 11
 +\xrightarrow{1} 10 \xrightarrow{\text{out}} 00$) with $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t=1$.  %
 +The final polarization (teal) is responsible for the emitted signal, which is then passed through a
 +frequency bandpass filter to emulate monochromator detection (Fig. \ref{fig:overview}c).  %
 +The resulting signal is explored in 2D delay space (Fig. \ref{fig:overview}d), 2D frequency space
 +(Fig. \ref{fig:overview}f), and hybrid delay-frequency space (Fig. \ref{fig:overview}e).  %
 +The detuning frequency axes are also normalized by the pulse bandwidth, $\Delta_{\omega}$.  %
 +
 +We now consider the generalized Liouville pathway $L:\rho_0 \xrightarrow{x} \rho_1 \xrightarrow{y}
 +\rho_2 \xrightarrow{z} \rho_3 \xrightarrow{\text{out}} \rho_4$, where $x$, $y$, and $z$ denote
 +properties of the first, second, and third pulse, respectively, and indices 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4
 +define the properties of the ground state, first, second, third, and fourth density matrix
 +elements, respectively.  %
 +Fig. \ref{fig:overview}b demonstrates the correspondence between $x$, $y$, $z$ notation and 1, 2,
 +$2^\prime$ notation for the laser pulses with pathway $V\gamma$.\footnote{For elucidation of the
 +  relationship between the generalized Liouville pathway notation and the specific parameters for
 +  each Liouville pathway, see Table S1 in the Supplementary Information.}  %
 +
 +The electric field emitted from a Liouville pathway is proportional to the polarization created by
 +the third-order coherence:  %
 +\begin{equation}\label{eq:E_L}
 +E_L(t) = i \mu_{4}\rho_{3}(t).
 +\end{equation}
 +Equation \ref{eq:E_L} assumes perfect phase-matching and no pulse distortions through propagation.  Equation \ref{eq:rho_f_int} shows that the output field for this Liouville pathway is
 +	\begin{gather}\label{eq:E_L_full}
 +	\begin{split}
 +	E_L(t) =& \frac{i}{8}\lambda_1\lambda_2\lambda_3\mu_1\mu_2\mu_3\mu_4 
 +	e^{i\left( \kappa_1\omega_x\tau_x + \kappa_2\omega_y\tau_y + \kappa_3\omega_z\tau_z \right)} 
 +	e^{-i\left( \kappa_3 \omega_z + \kappa_2 \omega_y + \kappa_1 \omega_x \right) t} \\
 +	&\times \iiint_{-\infty}^{\infty} c_z(t-u-\tau_z) c_y(t-u-v-\tau_y) c_x(t-u-v-w-\tau_x) R_L(u,v,w) dw \ dv \ du	,	
 +	\end{split}\\
 +	R_L(u,v,w) = \Theta(w)e^{-\left(\Gamma_1 + i\kappa_1\Omega_{1x} \right)w}
 +	\Theta(v)e^{-\left(\Gamma_2 + i\left[ \kappa_1\Omega_{1x}+\kappa_2\Omega_{2y} \right] \right)v}
 +	\Theta(u)e^{-\left(\Gamma_3 + i\left[ \kappa_1\Omega_{1x}+\kappa_2\Omega_{2y}+\kappa_3\Omega_{3z} \right] \right)u},
 +	\end{gather}
 +where $R_L$ is the third-order response function for the Liouville pathway.  %
 +The total electric field will be the superposition of all the Liouville pathways:
 +\begin{equation}\label{eq:superposition}
 +E_{\text{tot}}= \sum_L E_L(t).
 +\end{equation}
 +For the superposition of Equation \ref{eq:superposition} to be non-canceling, certain symmetries
 +between the pathways must be broken.  %
 +In general, this requires one or more of the following inequalities:  $\Gamma_{10}\neq\Gamma_{21}$,
 +$\omega_{10}\neq\omega_{21}$, and/or $\sqrt{2}\mu_{10}\neq\mu_{21}$.  %
 +Our simulations use the last inequality, which is important in two-level systems ($\mu_{21}=0$) and
 +in systems where state-filling dominates the non-linear response, such as in semiconductor
 +excitons.  %
 +The exact ratio between $\mu_{10}$ and $\mu_{21}$ affects the absolute amplitude of the field, but
 +does not affect the multidimensional line shape.  %
 +Importantly, the dipole inequality does not break the symmetry of double quantum coherence pathways
 +(time-orderings II and IV), so such pathways are not present in our analysis.  %
 +
 +In MR-CMDS, a monochromator resolves the driven output frequency from other nonlinear output
 +frequencies, which in our case is $\omega_m = \omega_1 - \omega_2 + \omega_{2'} = \omega_1$.  %
 +The monochromator can also enhance spectral resolution, as we show in Section
 +\ref{sec:evolution_SQC}.  %
 +In this simulation, the detection is emulated by transforming $E_{\text{tot}}(t)$ into the
 +frequency domain, applying a narrow bandpass filter, $M(\omega)$, about $\omega_1$, and applying
 +amplitude-scaled detection:
 +\begin{equation}\label{eq:S_tot}
 +S_{\text{tot}}(\omega_1, \omega_2, \tau_{21}, \tau_{22^\prime}) = 
 +\sqrt{ \int\left| M(\omega-\omega_1) E_{\text{tot}}(\omega) \right|^2 d\omega},
 +\end{equation}
 +where $E_{\text{tot}}(\omega)$ denotes the Fourier transform of $E_{\text{tot}}(t)$ (see Fig.
 +\ref{fig:overview}c).  %
 +For $M$ we used a rectangular function of width $0.408\Delta_{\omega}$.  %
 +The arguments of $S_{\text{tot}}$ refer to the \textit{experimental} degrees of freedom.  %
 +The signal delay dependence is parameterized with the relative delays $\tau_{21}$ and
 +$\tau_{22^\prime}$, where $\tau_{nm} = \tau_n - \tau_m$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:overview}b).  %
 +Table S1 summarizes the arguments for each Liouville pathway.  %
 +Fig. \ref{fig:overview}f shows the 2D $(\omega_1, \omega_2)$ $S_{\text{tot}}$ spectrum resulting
 +from the pulse delay times represented in Fig. \ref{fig:overview}b.  %
 +
 +\subsection{Inhomogeneity}
 +
 +Inhomogeneity is isolated in CMDS through both spectral signatures, such as
 +line-narrowing\cite{Besemann2004,Oudar1980,Carlson1990,Riebe1988,Steehler1985}, and temporal
 +signatures, such as photon echoes\cite{Weiner1985,Agarwal2002}.  %
 +We simulate the effects of static inhomogeneous broadening by convolving the homogeneous response
 +with a Gaussian distribution function.  %
 +Further details of the convolution are in Appendix \ref{sec:convolution}.  %
 +Dynamic broadening effects such as spectral diffusion are beyond the scope of this work.  %
 +
 +\section{Methods}  % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 +A matrix representation of differential equations of the type in Equation \ref{eq:E_L_full} was
 +numerically integrated for parallel computation of Liouville elements (see SI for
 +details).\cite{Dick1983,Gelin2005}  %
 +The lower bound of integration was $2\Delta_t$ before the first pulse, and the upper bound was
 +$5\Gamma_{10}^{-1}$ after the last pulse, with step sizes much shorter than the pulse durations.  %
 +Integration was performed in the FID rotating frame; the time steps were chosen so that both the
 +system-pulse difference frequencies and the pulse envelope were well-sampled.  %
 +
 +The following simulations explore the four-dimensional $(\omega_1, \omega_2, \tau_{21},
 +\tau_{22^\prime})$ variable space.  %
 +Both frequencies are scanned about the resonance, and both delays are scanned about pulse overlap.
 +We explored the role of sample dephasing rate by calculating signal for systems with dephasing
 +rates such that $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t=0.5, 1,$ and $2$.  %
 +Inhomogeneous broadening used a spectral FWHM, $\Delta_{\text{inhom}}$, that satisfied
 +$\Delta_\text{inhom}/ \Delta_{\omega}=0,0.5,1,$ and $2$ for the three dephasing rates.  %
 +For all these dimensions, both $\rho_3(t;\omega_1, \omega_2, \tau_{21}, \tau_{22^\prime})$ and
 +$S_{\text{tot}}(\omega_1, \omega_2, \tau_{21}, \tau_{22^\prime})$ are recorded for each unique
 +Liouville pathway.  %
 +Our simulations were done using the open-source SciPy library.\cite{Oliphant2007}  %
 +
 +\section{Results}  % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 +
 +We now present portions of our simulated data that highlight the dependence of the spectral line
 +shapes and transients on excitation pulse width, the dephasing rate, detuning from resonance, the
 +pulse delay times, and inhomogeneous broadening.  %
 +
 +\subsection{Evolution of single coherence}\label{sec:evolution_SQC}
 +
 +\begin{figure}
 +	\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{"mixed_domain/fid vs dpr"}
 +	\caption{
 +		The relative importance of FID and driven response for a single quantum coherence as a function
 +    of the relative dephasing rate (values of $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t$ are shown inset).
 +		The black line shows the coherence amplitude profile, while the shaded color indicates the
 +    instantaneous frequency (see colorbar).
 +		For all cases, the pulsed excitation field (gray line, shown as electric field amplitude) is
 +    slightly detuned (relative detuning, $\Omega_{fx}/\Delta_{\omega}=0.1$).
 +	}
 +	\label{fig:fid_dpr}
 +\end{figure}
 +
 +It is illustrative to first consider the evolution of single coherences, $\rho_0 \xrightarrow{x}
 +\rho_1$, under various excitation conditions.  %
 +Fig. \ref{fig:fid_dpr} shows the temporal evolution of $\rho_1$ with various dephasing rates under
 +Gaussian excitation.  %
 +The value of $\rho_1$ differs only by phase factors between various Liouville pathways (this can be
 +verified by inspection of Equation \ref{eq:rho_f_int} under the various conditions in Table S1), so
 +the profiles in Fig. \ref{fig:fid_dpr} apply for the first interaction of any pathway.  %
 +The pulse frequency was detuned from resonance so that frequency changes could be visualized by the
 +color bar, but the detuning was kept slight so that it did not appreciably change the dimensionless
 +product, $\Delta_t \left(\Gamma_f + i\kappa_f \Omega_{fx}\right)\approx \Gamma_{10}\Delta_t$.  %
 +In this case, the evolution demonstrates the maximum impulsive character the transient can
 +achieve.  %
 +The instantaneous frequency, $d\varphi/dt$, is defined as
 +\begin{equation}
 +\frac{d\varphi}{dt} = \frac{d}{dt} \tan^{-1}\left( \frac{\text{Im}\left(\rho_1(t)\right)}{\text{Re}\left(\rho_1(t)\right)} \right).
 +\end{equation}
 +The cases of $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t=0 (\infty)$ agree with the impulsive (driven) expressions derived
 +in Appendix \ref{sec:cw_imp}.  %
 +For $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t=0$, the signal rises as the integral of the pulse and has instantaneous
 +frequency close to that of the pulse (Equation \ref{eq:sqc_rise}), but as the pulse vanishes, the
 +signal adopts the natural system frequency and decay rate (Equation \ref{eq:sqc_fid}).  %
 +For $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t=\infty$, the signal follows the amplitude and frequency of the pulse for
 +all times (the driven limit, Equation \ref{eq:sqc_driven}).  %
 +
 +The other three cases show a smooth interpolation between limits.  %
 +As $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t$ increases from the impulsive limit, the coherence within the pulse region
 +conforms less to a pulse integral profile and more to a pulse envelope profile.  %
 +In accordance, the FID component after the pulse becomes less prominent, and the instantaneous
 +frequency pins to the driving frequency more strongly through the course of evolution.  %
 +The trends can be understood by considering the differential form of evolution (Equation
 +\ref{eq:rho_f}), and the time-dependent balance of optical coupling and system relaxation.  %
 +We note that our choices of $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t=2.0, 1.0,$ and $0.5$ give coherences that have
 +mainly driven, roughly equal driven and FID parts, and mainly FID components, respectively.  %
 +FID character is difficult to isolate when $\Gamma_{10}\Delta_t=2.0$.  %
 +
 diff --git a/mixed_domain/convolve.pdf b/mixed_domain/convolve.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..03e6599 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/convolve.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/delay space ratios.pdf b/mixed_domain/delay space ratios.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..693e787 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/delay space ratios.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/fid vs detuning with freq.pdf b/mixed_domain/fid vs detuning with freq.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2231f52 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/fid vs detuning with freq.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/fid vs detuning.pdf b/mixed_domain/fid vs detuning.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..503de3d --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/fid vs detuning.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/fid vs dpr.pdf b/mixed_domain/fid vs dpr.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ddc17ef --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/fid vs dpr.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/inhom delay space ratios.pdf b/mixed_domain/inhom delay space ratios.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..afde5f2 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/inhom delay space ratios.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/inhom spectral evolution.pdf b/mixed_domain/inhom spectral evolution.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..21720b3 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/inhom spectral evolution.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/pw1 lineshapes no mono.pdf b/mixed_domain/pw1 lineshapes no mono.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7543076 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/pw1 lineshapes no mono.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/pw1 lineshapes.pdf b/mixed_domain/pw1 lineshapes.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ffc13c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/pw1 lineshapes.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/simulation overview.pdf b/mixed_domain/simulation overview.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f7156df --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/simulation overview.pdf diff --git a/mixed_domain/spectral evolution.pdf b/mixed_domain/spectral evolution.pdfBinary files differ new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f1ba58b --- /dev/null +++ b/mixed_domain/spectral evolution.pdf | 
