Pure Chromo-Natural Inflation: Signatures of Particle Production from Weak to Strong Backreaction

Alexandros Papageorgiou; Crist\'obal Zenteno Gatica; Ema Dimastrogiovanni; Matteo Fasiello

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Pure Chromo-Natural Inflation: Signatures of Particle Production from Weak to Strong Backreaction

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · 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 plateau-potential axion inflation inevitably leaves the weak-backreaction regime before inflation ends, leaving a three-peak chiral gravitational-wave signal and PBH-scale scalar fluctuations.

desk verdict A solid, honestly limited model-building paper whose new three-peak chiral GW and PBH signatures are worth refereeing, but whose 'invariably' claim needs the perturbativity check the authors themselves defer. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.17750 v1 pith:534RZ7KA submitted 2025-04-24 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-phhep-th

Ema Dimastrogiovanni , Matteo Fasiello , Alexandros Papageorgiou , Cristóbal Zenteno Gatica This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.COgr-qchep-phhep-th

keywords axioninflationchromo-naturalChern-SimonscouplingstrongbackreactiongravitationalwavesprimordialblackholeschiralityPNIpotential

topics Dark Matter

open problems Dark Matter

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 tries to establish that pure chromo-natural inflation—an axion rolling on a flat plateau potential, coupled to an SU(2) gauge sector through a Chern-Simons term—cannot spend the whole of inflation in the weak-backreaction regime. As the axion rolls, it keeps producing gauge quanta until the tensor fluctuations of the gauge sector feed back on the background dynamics, and the paper follows the system numerically through the resulting transition. It claims this transition leaves a distinctive three-peaked gravitational-wave spectrum with frequency-dependent chirality that next-generation interferometers could detect, alongside a scalar perturbation peak that could form primordial black holes and account for a significant fraction of dark matter. The plateau potential matters because it keeps the model inside the CMB-allowed region of the tensor-to-scalar ratio and scalar tilt, which the conventional sinusoidal chromo-natural potential has trouble satisfying.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on two particle-production parameters, $m_Q = gQ/H$ and $\xi = \lambda \dot{\chi}/(2Hf)$, together with the dispersion relation for the circular polarizations $\hat{t}_{R,L}$ of the gauge-field tensor fluctuations. In the weak-backreaction regime these obey $\xi = m_Q + 1/m_Q$ and the left-handed mode is tachyonic inside the horizon; in the strong-backreaction attractor they obey $m_Q \xi = -1$, which tames the left-handed mode while eventually making the right-handed mode unstable. The backreaction is implemented through the integrals $T^\chi_{\rm BR}$ and $T^Q_{\rm BR}$ that feed the gauge fluctuations back into the axion and gauge-field equations of motion, with the dominant superhorizon modes evolving as $x \hat{t}_L \sim c(k)/\sqrt{2k}$. This machinery lets the paper follow the background through the transition and compute the sourced scalar and tensor power spectra.

What would settle it

Run the same background evolution with the scalar-perturbation backreaction terms and scalar metric perturbations switched on and compare $m_Q(t)$, $H(t)$, and $\dot{\chi}(t)$ from the moment $m_Q$ crosses $|m_Q| < \sqrt{2}$ until the end of inflation; an order-one difference in any of them would overturn the computed spectra and PBH abundance.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that in pure chromo-natural inflation—the axion-inflaton of pure natural inflation with a flat plateau potential, coupled to an SU(2) gauge sector through a Chern-Simons term—the weak-backreaction regime cannot persist through the end of inflation. The rolling axion continuously dumps energy into gauge fluctuations; the particle-production parameter $m_Q = gQ/H$ grows until the tensor fluctuations of the gauge sector backreact on the background, and the system enters the strong-backreaction attractor with $m_Q \xi = -1$. During the transition, $m_Q$ crosses the instability band $|m_Q| < \sqrt{2}$, producing a peak in the scalar power spectrum, while the tachyonic gauge tensor modes source gravitational waves directly. For the fiducial parameters, the resulting gravitational-wave spectrum has three peaks—a left-handed linear-sourced peak, an unpolarized scalar-induced peak, and a right-handed peak—with a net chirality that changes with frequency, and the scalar peak can form primordial black holes that may supply a significant fraction of dark matter. The plateau potential keeps the model within CMB bounds on $r$ and $n_s$, avoiding the fine-tuning needed for the sinusoidal chromo-natural potential.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that ripples in the scalar field and in the spatial curvature barely push back on the expansion during the strong-backreaction phase; if they do, the predicted peak heights, black-hole abundance, and gravitational-wave peak positions would shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The transition from weak to strong backreaction is generic: for the parameter choices that match the CMB scalar amplitude, $m_Q$ reaches values $\gtrsim 10$ by the end of inflation, so the system cannot stay in the weak-backreaction regime unless the gauge coupling is tuned extremely small.
The gravitational-wave spectrum acquires a three-peak structure whose frequency separations are nearly insensitive to parameters; for the fiducial model the peaks sit around $f \sim 10^{-5}$ Hz, $10^{-2}$ Hz, and $10^{-1}$ Hz, within reach of LISA-class interferometers.
The chirality of the gravitational-wave signal is frequency dependent: the low-frequency peak is left-handed, the high-frequency peak is right-handed, and the scalar-induced part is unpolarized; measuring net circular polarization would be a smoking-gun signature of this transition.
The scalar power spectrum peaks at $k \sim 10^{13}\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$ with amplitude $\sim 10^{-3}$ for the fiducial parameters, and parameter choices that push $P_\zeta$ to $\sim 10^{-2}$ would make primordial black holes compatible with all of dark matter under monochromatic Gaussian assumptions.
Strong backreaction prolongs inflation, so CMB modes must have crossed the horizon fewer than the usual 60 e-folds before the end; accounting for this delay is necessary for consistent CMB normalization and for locating the signatures.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper leaves the combined scalar-and-tensor backreaction problem to future work; if scalar backreaction is not negligible during the strong-backreaction transition, the Hubble history and thus the peak frequencies in the gravitational-wave spectrum would shift, so the three-peak spacing may not be as robust as it appears.
The same strong-backreaction machinery could plausibly be applied to spectator axion sectors in an axiverse setup, where multiple axions each source gauge fields; the result would be a superposition of chiral peaks—a gravitational-wave forest—extending beyond the weak-backreaction regime.
Because the paper ends inflation with a sudden cutoff of the potential, the post-inflationary reheating dynamics (for example glueball decay or kination) could alter the high-frequency part of the gravitational-wave spectrum; the right-handed peak's amplitude is the most sensitive place to look.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: I agree with the conditional verdict, with one tweak. Moving the chromo-natural machinery from the cosine potential to the pure natural inflation plateau is not cosmetic: it changes CMB compatibility, delays the weak-to-strong backreaction transition, and produces a genuinely new observable template — a chiral three-peak GW spectrum plus a scalar peak at PBH scales. The qualitative claim that strong backreaction is generically reached is plausible and probably right. The quantitative spectra should be treated as model predictions conditional on checks the paper itself flags as unfinished.

What works: the PNI choice is well motivated by the large-Nc origin, and the paper shows explicitly why it does better than sinusoidal CNI against Planck/BICEP. The phase decomposition is clear, and the analytic SBR attractor relations give a useful handle on a regime that is usually studied numerically. The scalar perturbation equations in Appendix A are written without de Sitter or WBR assumptions, which is a real addition. The CMB normalization in Appendix B fixes g from P_zeta rather than fitting small-scale output, so the three-peak and PBH claims are derived, not imposed. The citation pattern is fine; the SBR formulas lean on the authors' own prior papers [66,67], but those are the relevant published results and they say so.

Soft spots, in order. (1) The strongest claim — "invariably" triggering SBR — is not yet established. In the conclusions they defer the perturbativity constraints of [115] to lattice work. If those bounds bite before m_Q reaches the threshold in Eq. (2.19), the classical transition and all three peaks lie outside the regime of validity. The conditional version of the claim is supported; the unconditional abstract wording is not. (2) Scalar backreaction and scalar metric perturbations are dropped, with the scalar sector coupled to the background through the instability band. The slow-roll suppression argument is plausible, but it is an assumption, and the scalar peak amplitude and PBH fraction are exactly the observables that would move. (3) The sudden end at chi_crit is an ad hoc mechanism, and reheating is not modeled. Peak positions and amplitudes after kination or dark radiation will shift once reheating is included. (4) No code and no error bars; the spectra are representative.

Who gets value: the axion-gauge inflation community and GW forecasting groups. I would send this to a serious referee rather than desk reject, with instructions to focus on the perturbativity check and scalar-backreaction robustness. I would not put the fiducial spectra in a review as firm predictions, but I would cite this as the concrete PNI target.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies pure chromo-natural inflation (PCNI), obtained by replacing the sinusoidal potential of chromo-natural inflation with the pure natural inflation (PNI) potential while keeping the SU(2) gauge sector and Chern-Simons coupling. It reviews the weak and strong backreaction regimes of the model, argues that the particle production parameter m_Q grows monotonically in the weak backreaction regime so that the system inevitably transitions to strong backreaction before the end of inflation, and introduces a sudden-end potential to terminate inflation before the right-handed-mode instability and the scalar effective-mass suppression become dangerous. For a fiducial parameter set, Eq. (4.1), the paper computes the scalar power spectrum and the total gravitational wave background, finding a three-peak, scale-dependent chiral spectrum that would be detectable by LISA, and a scalar peak that could support significant primordial black hole production. The central claims are the generic weak-to-strong backreaction transition and the resulting observable spectra.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper provides a concrete, falsifiable target for next-generation gravitational wave detectors: a chiral, multi-peaked GW spectrum whose peak spacing is predicted to be robust to parameter changes. It also shows that the PNI plateau improves compatibility with CMB observations compared to the cosine potential of standard chromo-natural inflation. The paper's approach has notable strengths: the strong backreaction attractor formulas are analytic and coherent, the background evolution is solved numerically with tensor backreaction included, and the small-scale predictions are not fitted to small-scale data, since the gauge coupling g is fixed by the CMB scalar amplitude and the GW and PBH outputs are then computed. However, no code is provided, the numerical spectra lack convergence tests, and two admitted gaps, the neglected perturbativity constraints and the neglected scalar backreaction, bear directly on the paper's strongest claims.

major comments (3)

[Abstract; Sec. 2.3; Sec. 5] The claim that the dynamics 'invariably' trigger strong backreaction is not fully supported, because the analytic argument in Sec. 2.3, Eqs. (2.19)-(2.21), only establishes growth of m_Q within the classical homogeneous-plus-tensor-backreaction system. As the authors state in Sec. 5, the recently derived perturbativity constraints of Ref. [115] can be competitive with backreaction limits, and 'only a full numerical analysis of both effects, preferably on the lattice, can ascertain whether strong backreaction is always accessible without running into perturbativity bounds first.' Since the fiducial coupling g = 6.5e-4 in Eq. (4.1) produces large gauge occupation numbers during Phases II and III, this is precisely the regime where the missing check matters most. The abstract should either be qualified or accompanied by a quantitative check of the Ref. [115] bounds along the fiducial trajectory.
[Appendix A; Sec. 5; Fig. 9] The scalar-power-spectrum and PBH predictions are computed while setting scalar metric perturbations to zero (App. A, delta g_ij|scalar = 0) and while deferring combined tensor and scalar backreaction to future work (Sec. 5). If scalar fluctuations backreact appreciably during Phase III, the height of the P_zeta peak in Fig. 9 and the Hubble history that fixes the GW peak positions would both be modified. The paper's expectation that this is safe because metric couplings are slow-roll suppressed is plausible but not quantified in the strong-backreaction phase, where the slow-roll parameters are not uniformly small. The PBH claim requires either a quantitative estimate of the neglected scalar backreaction or an explicit statement that the PBH abundance is only indicative.
[Sec. 4; Figs. 9 and 10] The central quantitative outputs, in particular the scalar peak amplitude P_zeta ~ 1e-3 and the LISA-relevant GW amplitudes, are presented without numerical convergence tests, uncertainty estimates, or a public implementation. Because these amplitudes determine the detectability and PBH claims, the manuscript should document the cutoff dependence of the backreaction integrals, the number of momentum modes used, and the validity of the WKB initial conditions in Eq. (A.8) during the strongly time-dependent transition. Without this information, the robustness of the three-peak structure cannot be independently assessed.

minor comments (4)

[Sec. 4, text near Fig. 10] The sentence referring to direct GW sourcing cites 'Eqs. (2.10) and (2.10)'; this should be Eqs. (2.10)-(2.11).
[Fig. 7 caption] The caption does not specify which boundary line corresponds to 30 versus 45 e-folds of weak-backreaction evolution, nor the direction in which m_Q,CMB increases along the shaded regions; please clarify.
[Sec. 4 and Abstract] The PBH claim is qualitative: no PBH abundance is computed, and the text only notes that an amplitude near 1e-2 is needed for dark matter in the monochromatic Gaussian case. A brief statement of the formalism used to extract a PBH fraction from the computed P_zeta would strengthen the claim.
[Sec. 2.6.2] The bound eta_chi < Lambda^2 x 1e-2 is stated as 'reliable' after a numerical check shown in Fig. 5, but the figure shows only 10% and 20% deviation curves; stating the criterion more explicitly in the caption would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the CMB normalization fixes g, the small-scale GW and PBH spectra are computed rather than fitted, and same-author citations are transparent prior work rather than forced inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is largely self-contained and none of its central predictions reduces to an input by construction. The only externally fixed quantity, the gauge coupling g, is solved from the observed CMB scalar amplitude in Eq. (B.6), g ≈ sqrt(16π^2 m_Q^4 P_ζ,obs / (Λ^2 |x√(2k) X̂|^2 (1+R_δχ))), and is then used as an input to evolve the system. The small-scale scalar power spectrum, PBH-relevant peak, and GW spectrum are computed by numerically evolving the background with tensor backreaction and solving the scalar perturbation system of App. A, with the scalar-induced GW contribution obtained from the external code SIGWfast. None of these outputs is fed back as a fitted parameter. The analytic argument that weak backreaction is generically followed by strong backreaction (Eqs. 2.19–2.21 plus Fig. 1) is an estimate using the CMB-normalized m_Q values, not an identity with the conclusion. Some strong-backreaction attractor formulas and scalar-instability results are summarized from prior work [66,67]; [66] is not authored by the present authors, and [67], though same-author, is used as a transparent prior derivation rather than an unexamined black box: App. A explicitly writes out the full perturbation equations and notes the limit in which they reproduce App. A of [67]. This is self-citation, but it is not load-bearing in the sense of substituting for an argument: the spectra in Sec. 4 are computed in this paper. The paper's own stated limitations — the neglect of scalar metric perturbations (App. A), the deferral of a combined scalar-plus-tensor backreaction study (Sec. 5), and the recently derived perturbativity constraints [115] that 'can be competitive with backreaction limits' — are validity and scope caveats on the strength of the 'invariably' claim, not circular reductions. In particular, the sentence in Sec. 5 that 'only a full numerical analysis of both effects, preferably on the lattice, can ascertain whether strong backreaction is always accessible without running into perturbativity bounds first' is an honest admission of a missing check, but it does not turn the derivation into a restatement of its inputs. No step was found in which a predicted quantity is defined in terms of the target quantity, or in which a fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 9 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model has nine hand-picked or fitted parameters. The SBR attractor and simplified backreaction integrals are imported from the authors' prior work [66,67]; scalar backreaction and metric perturbations are neglected. The central observable predictions therefore rest on these choices plus the ad hoc sudden-end potential.

free parameters (9)

gauge coupling g = 6.5e-4 (fiducial)
Fixed by CMB normalization of P_zeta to 2.1e-9 via Eq. (B.6) for chosen m_Q,CMB and Lambda_CMB; the small-scale GW and scalar predictions depend on this fitted value.
Chern-Simons coupling tilde_lambda = 760 (fiducial)
Chosen, together with other parameters, so that the WBR to SBR transition occurs 25-35 e-folds before the end of inflation (Sec. 4, criterion i); directly controls the GW peak position and LISA detectability.
potential scale M^4 = 4.9e-11 M_p^4
Adjusted so CMB amplitude and 60 e-folds are obtained; enters P_zeta,CMB formula and the Hubble scale.
potential plateau scale F = 7.2 M_p
Chosen to satisfy CMB r and n_s and the timing of the transition; F larger than M_p is allowed because the axion decay constant f = F/N_c can be sub-Planckian.
potential power p = 9
Selected in the explored p=4 and p=10 range to get the fiducial spectra; affects the plateau shape and transition timing.
initial axion value chi_CMB = -3.95 M_p
Chosen so CMB scales leave the horizon in the weak backreaction regime and total inflation lasts 60 e-folds.
sudden-end field value chi_crit = not quoted; chosen to yield 60 e-folds
The potential is set to zero for chi larger than chi_crit to end inflation before eta_chi suppresses perturbations; a free model-building parameter.
m_Q,CMB at CMB scales = 2.35 to 2.5 in scanned range
Dimensionless gauge VEV parameter at CMB scales; selected within the allowed window (B.7) and affects P_zeta, transition time, and peak positions.
Lambda_CMB at CMB scales = 2 (fiducial)
Dimensionless Chern-Simons coupling at CMB scales, chosen within the window sqrt(2) < Lambda_CMB < O(1) (B.8); controls the nonlinear contribution and scalar instability growth.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption FRW background with homogeneous SU(2) VEV A_i^a = a Q delta_i^a is an attractor and remains isotropic during the transition.
Eq. (2.1) and Sec. 2; isotropization from [48,49], but the transition and SBR phases are assumed to stay on this background.
domain assumption In the weak backreaction regime, slow roll with Q_dot approximately 0 and negligible backreaction terms holds; Eqs. (2.15)-(2.17).
This is the standard WBR approximation imported from the CNI literature; it sets the starting point of the evolution.
domain assumption Strong backreaction attractor m_Q xi = -1 (Eq. 2.22) and the simplified backreaction integrals (Eq. 2.25) are valid.
These central SBR results are imported from prior work [66,67] rather than rederived in full or backed by released code.
domain assumption Scalar metric perturbations and scalar backreaction can be neglected.
App. A sets delta g_ij|scalar = 0 and the Conclusions defer scalar backreaction to future work; if violated, the scalar peak and PBH estimates change.
ad hoc to paper The potential cutoff at chi_crit is physically realizable and reheating proceeds as assumed.
The sudden-end potential (3.1) is a toy-model device; reheating and the transition to radiation domination are left to future work.
domain assumption Linear perturbation theory and WKB initial conditions (A.8) apply throughout the strong backreaction transition.
The paper uses linearized scalar equations and WKB initial conditions; the Conclusions note that only a full numerical or lattice analysis can ascertain whether strong backreaction is always accessible before perturbativity bounds.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Pure Chromo-Natural Inflation: Signatures of Particle Production from Weak to Strong Backreaction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/534RZ7KA

@misc{pith2026250417750,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Pure Chromo-Natural Inflation: Signatures of Particle Production from Weak to Strong Backreaction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/534RZ7KA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.17750}
}

read the original abstract

We consider, in the context of axion-inflation, the \textit{Pure Natural Inflation} (PNI) model coupled with an SU(2) gauge sector via a Chern-Simons term. As the axion rolls down its potential, it dissipates energy in the gauge sector thus sourcing fluctuations of scalar and tensor degrees of freedom therein. Gauge field fluctuations will, in turn, feed primordial gravitational waves as well as curvature perturbations. Remarkably, we can use upcoming cosmological probes to test this mechanism across a vast range of scales, from the CMB to laser interferometers. Due to their flat plateau at large field values, we find that PNI potentials fare better vis-\'{a}-vis CMB observations than the conventional sinusoidal potential of chromo-natural inflation (CNI). We show that, even when the dynamics begin in the weak backreaction regime, the rolling of the axion leads to a build-up of the gauge-quanta production, invariably triggering the strong backreaction of the gauge sector tensors on the background dynamics. This transition results in the copious production of both scalar and tensor perturbations, which we study in detail. The gravitational wave signatures include a rich peak structure with a characteristic scale-dependent chirality, a compelling target for future gravitational wave detectors. Additionally, the peak in scalar perturbations may lead to the formation of primordial black holes, potentially accounting for a significant fraction of the observed dark matter abundance.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

Constraining primordial non-Gaussianity and parity-violation through Scalar-Induced Gravitational Waves with next-generation ground-based interferometers
astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

ET+CE forecast: injected SIGW parameters (A_p, f_peak, f_NL, tau_NL, parity-odd tau_tilde_NL) are recovered within 1-2 sigma despite an astrophysical foreground, but the chiral V-mode is sub-threshold (SNR 0.5-1.9).
Pure Natural Inflation Passes the ACT
astro-ph.CO 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

Pure natural inflation remains viable against latest ACT+DESI constraints, with a non-trivial fraction of parameter space allowed under standard reheating scenarios.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

[115]

A universal constraint on axion non-Abelian dynamics during inflation,

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, M. Michelotti, and O. ¨Ozsoy, “A universal constraint on axion non-Abelian dynamics during inflation,” JCAP 03 (2025) 007, arXiv:2405.17411 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2025
[1]

Alternatives to the inflationary paradigm of structure formation,

R. H. Brandenberger, “Alternatives to the inflationary paradigm of structure formation,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. Conf. Ser. 01 (2011) 67–79, arXiv:0902.4731 [hep-th]

arXiv 2011
[2]

Particle physics models of inflation and the cosmological density perturbation,

D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto, “Particle physics models of inflation and the cosmological density perturbation,” Phys. Rept. 314 (1999) 1–146, arXiv:hep-ph/9807278

arXiv 1999
[3]

Did LIGO detect dark matter?,

S. Bird, I. Cholis, J. B. Mu˜ noz, Y. Ali-Ha¨ ımoud, M. Kamionkowski, E. D. Kovetz, A. Raccanelli, and A. G. Riess, “Did LIGO detect dark matter?,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 no. 20, (2016) 201301, arXiv:1603.00464 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2016
[4]

Baumann and L

D. Baumann and L. McAllister, Inflation and String Theory . Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 5, 2015. arXiv:1404.2601 [hep-th]

arXiv 2015
[5]

The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts,

Simons Observatory Collaboration, P. Ade et al., “The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts,” JCAP 02 (2019) 056, arXiv:1808.07445 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2019
[6]

CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition,

CMB-S4 Collaboration, K. N. Abazajian et al., “CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition,” arXiv:1610.02743 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[7]

Snowmass 2021 CMB-S4 White Paper,

CMB-S4 Collaboration, K. Abazajian et al., “Snowmass 2021 CMB-S4 White Paper,” arXiv:2203.08024 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2021

Show all 119 references

[8]

Cosmology and fundamental physics with the Euclid satellite,

L. Amendola et al., “Cosmology and fundamental physics with the Euclid satellite,” Living Rev. Rel. 21 no. 1, (2018) 2, arXiv:1606.00180 [astro-ph.CO]

2018 arXiv
[9]

LSST Science Book, Version 2.0,

LSST Science, LSST Project Collaboration, P. A. Abell et al., “LSST Science Book, Version 2.0,” arXiv:0912.0201 [astro-ph.IM]

arXiv
[10]

The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array: IV. Implications for massive black holes, dark matter and the early Universe,

EPTA Collaboration, J. Antoniadis et al., “The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array: IV. Implications for massive black holes, dark matter and the early Universe,” arXiv:2306.16227 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[11]

The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-wave Background,

NANOGrav Collaboration, G. Agazie et al., “The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-wave Background,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 951 no. 1, (2023) L8, arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]

2023 arXiv
[12]

Cosmology with Phase 1 of the Square Kilometre Array: Red Book 2018: Technical specifications and performance forecasts,

SKA Collaboration, D. J. Bacon et al., “Cosmology with Phase 1 of the Square Kilometre Array: Red Book 2018: Technical specifications and performance forecasts,” Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 37 (2020) e007, arXiv:1811.02743 [astro-ph.CO]

2020 arXiv
[13]

Exploring the Sensitivity of Next Generation Gravitational Wave Detectors,

LIGO Scientific Collaboration, B. P. Abbott et al., “Exploring the Sensitivity of Next Generation Gravitational Wave Detectors,” Class. Quant. Grav. 34 no. 4, (2017) 044001, arXiv:1607.08697 [astro-ph.IM]

2017 arXiv
[14]

Constraints on the Cosmic Expansion History from GWTC–3,

LIGO Scientific, Virgo, KAGRA Collaboration, R. Abbott et al., “Constraints on the Cosmic Expansion History from GWTC–3,” Astrophys. J. 949 no. 2, (2023) 76, arXiv:2111.03604 [astro-ph.CO]

2023 arXiv
[15]

Cosmology with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna,

LISA Cosmology Working Group Collaboration, P. Auclair et al., “Cosmology with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna,” Living Rev. Rel. 26 no. 1, (2023) 5, arXiv:2204.05434 [astro-ph.CO]

2023 arXiv
[16]

Science Case for the Einstein Telescope,

M. Maggiore et al., “Science Case for the Einstein Telescope,” JCAP 03 (2020) 050, arXiv:1912.02622 [astro-ph.CO]

2020 arXiv
[17]

Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribution to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO,

D. Reitze et al., “Cosmic Explorer: The U.S. Contribution to Gravitational-Wave Astronomy beyond LIGO,” Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51 no. 7, (2019) 035, arXiv:1907.04833 [astro-ph.IM] . – 30 –

2019 arXiv
[18]

Current status of space gravitational wave antenna DECIGO and B-DECIGO,

S. Kawamura et al., “Current status of space gravitational wave antenna DECIGO and B-DECIGO,” PTEP 2021 no. 5, (2021) 05A105, arXiv:2006.13545 [gr-qc]

2021 arXiv
[19]

Primordial non-gaussianity from the bispectrum of 21-cm fluctuations in the dark ages,

J. B. Mu˜ noz, Y. Ali-Ha¨ ımoud, and M. Kamionkowski, “Primordial non-gaussianity from the bispectrum of 21-cm fluctuations in the dark ages,” Phys. Rev. D 92 no. 8, (2015) 083508, arXiv:1506.04152 [astro-ph.CO]

2015 arXiv
[20]

Natural inflation with pseudo - Nambu-Goldstone bosons,

K. Freese, J. A. Frieman, and A. V. Olinto, “Natural inflation with pseudo - Nambu-Goldstone bosons,” Phys.Rev.Lett. 65 (1990) 3233–3236

1990
[21]

Natural inflation: Particle physics models, power law spectra for large scale structure, and constraints from COBE,

F. C. Adams, J. R. Bond, K. Freese, J. A. Frieman, and A. V. Olinto, “Natural inflation: Particle physics models, power law spectra for large scale structure, and constraints from COBE,” Phys.Rev. D47 (1993) 426–455, arXiv:hep-ph/9207245 [hep-ph]

1993 arXiv
[22]

Natural Inflation: Consistency with Cosmic Microwave Background Observations of Planck and BICEP2,

K. Freese and W. H. Kinney, “Natural Inflation: Consistency with Cosmic Microwave Background Observations of Planck and BICEP2,” JCAP 03 (2015) 044, arXiv:1403.5277 [astro-ph.CO]

2015 arXiv
[23]

Chromo-Natural inflation in Supergravity,

G. Dall’Agata, “Chromo-Natural inflation in Supergravity,” Phys. Lett. B 782 (2018) 139–142, arXiv:1804.03104 [hep-th]

2018 arXiv
[24]

On chromonatural inflation in string theory,

J. Holland, I. Zavala, and G. Tasinato, “On chromonatural inflation in string theory,” JCAP 12 (2020) 026, arXiv:2009.00653 [hep-th]

2020 arXiv
[25]

Gravitational Axiverse Spectroscopy: Seeing the Forest for the Axions,

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, J. M. Leedom, M. Putti, and A. Westphal, “Gravitational Axiverse Spectroscopy: Seeing the Forest for the Axions,” arXiv:2312.13431 [hep-th]

arXiv
[26]

Pure Natural Inflation,

Y. Nomura, T. Watari, and M. Yamazaki, “Pure Natural Inflation,” Phys. Lett. B 776 (2018) 227–230, arXiv:1706.08522 [hep-ph]

2018 arXiv
[27]

Tensor Modes in Pure Natural Inflation,

Y. Nomura and M. Yamazaki, “Tensor Modes in Pure Natural Inflation,” Phys. Lett. B 780 (2018) 106–110, arXiv:1711.10490 [hep-ph]

2018 arXiv
[28]

Chromo-Natural Inflation: Natural inflation on a steep potential with classical non-Abelian gauge fields,

P. Adshead and M. Wyman, “Chromo-Natural Inflation: Natural inflation on a steep potential with classical non-Abelian gauge fields,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 261302, arXiv:1202.2366 [hep-th]

2012 arXiv
[29]

Stability analysis of chromo-natural inflation and possible evasion of Lyth’s bound,

E. Dimastrogiovanni and M. Peloso, “Stability analysis of chromo-natural inflation and possible evasion of Lyth’s bound,” Phys. Rev. D87 no. 10, (2013) 103501, arXiv:1212.5184 [astro-ph.CO]

2013 arXiv
[30]

Low-Energy Effective Field Theory for Chromo-Natural Inflation,

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, and A. J. Tolley, “Low-Energy Effective Field Theory for Chromo-Natural Inflation,” JCAP 02 (2013) 046, arXiv:1211.1396 [hep-th]

2013 arXiv
[31]

Gauge Fields and Inflation,

A. Maleknejad, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and J. Soda, “Gauge Fields and Inflation,” Phys. Rept. 528 (2013) 161–261, arXiv:1212.2921 [hep-th]

2013 arXiv
[32]

Perturbations in Chromo-Natural Inflation,

P. Adshead, E. Martinec, and M. Wyman, “Perturbations in Chromo-Natural Inflation,” JHEP 09 (2013) 087, arXiv:1305.2930 [hep-th]

2013 arXiv
[33]

Chromo-Natural Model in Anisotropic Background,

A. Maleknejad and E. Erfani, “Chromo-Natural Model in Anisotropic Background,” JCAP 03 (2014) 016, arXiv:1311.3361 [hep-th]

2014 arXiv
[34]

Chiral Gravity Waves and Leptogenesis in Inflationary Models with non-Abelian Gauge Fields,

A. Maleknejad, “Chiral Gravity Waves and Leptogenesis in Inflationary Models with non-Abelian Gauge Fields,” Phys. Rev. D 90 no. 2, (2014) 023542, arXiv:1401.7628 [hep-th]

2014 arXiv
[35]

Higgsed Chromo-Natural Inflation,

P. Adshead, E. Martinec, E. I. Sfakianakis, and M. Wyman, “Higgsed Chromo-Natural Inflation,” JHEP 12 (2016) 137, arXiv:1609.04025 [hep-th]

2016 arXiv
[36]

Gravitational leptogenesis in axion inflation with SU(2) gauge field,

A. Maleknejad, “Gravitational leptogenesis in axion inflation with SU(2) gauge field,” JCAP 12 (2016) 027, arXiv:1604.06520 [hep-ph] . – 31 –

2016 arXiv
[37]

Production and Backreaction of Spin-2 Particles of SU (2) Gauge Field during Inflation,

A. Maleknejad and E. Komatsu, “Production and Backreaction of Spin-2 Particles of SU (2) Gauge Field during Inflation,” JHEP 05 (2019) 174, arXiv:1808.09076 [hep-ph]

2019 arXiv
[38]

Nonlinear perturbations from the coupling of the inflaton to a non-Abelian gauge field, with a focus on Chromo-Natural Inflation,

A. Papageorgiou, M. Peloso, and C. Unal, “Nonlinear perturbations from the coupling of the inflaton to a non-Abelian gauge field, with a focus on Chromo-Natural Inflation,” JCAP 09 (2018) 030, arXiv:1806.08313 [astro-ph.CO]

2018 arXiv
[39]

Schwinger Effect by an SU (2) Gauge Field during Inflation,

K. D. Lozanov, A. Maleknejad, and E. Komatsu, “Schwinger Effect by an SU (2) Gauge Field during Inflation,” JHEP 02 (2019) 041, arXiv:1805.09318 [hep-th]

2019 arXiv
[40]

Clockwork Axions in Cosmology: Is Chromonatural Inflation Chrononatural?,

P. Agrawal, J. Fan, and M. Reece, “Clockwork Axions in Cosmology: Is Chromonatural Inflation Chrononatural?,” JHEP 10 (2018) 193, arXiv:1806.09621 [hep-th]

2018 arXiv
[41]

Production and backreaction of fermions from axion-SU (2) gauge fields during inflation,

L. Mirzagholi, A. Maleknejad, and K. D. Lozanov, “Production and backreaction of fermions from axion-SU (2) gauge fields during inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 101 no. 8, (2020) 083528, arXiv:1905.09258 [hep-th]

2020 arXiv
[42]

Universality of linear perturbations in SU(N) natural inflation,

T. Fujita, K. Murai, and R. Namba, “Universality of linear perturbations in SU(N) natural inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 105 no. 10, (2022) 103518, arXiv:2203.03977 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[43]

Primordial gravitational waves in non-minimally coupled chromo-natural inflation,

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, M. Michelotti, and L. Pinol, “Primordial gravitational waves in non-minimally coupled chromo-natural inflation,” JCAP 02 (2024) 039, arXiv:2303.10718 [astro-ph.CO]

2024 arXiv
[44]

Chromo-natural inflation supported by enhanced friction from Horndeski gravity,

T. Murata and T. Kobayashi, “Chromo-natural inflation supported by enhanced friction from Horndeski gravity,” JCAP 10 (2024) 044, arXiv:2408.01773 [astro-ph.CO]

2024 arXiv
[45]

Kinetic Gauge Friction in Natural Inflation,

M. Michelotti, R. Gonzalez Quaglia, E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, and D. Roest, “Kinetic Gauge Friction in Natural Inflation,” arXiv:2411.19892 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[46]

Yang-Mills cosmology: Cold matter for a hot universe,

D. V. Galtsov and M. S. Volkov, “Yang-Mills cosmology: Cold matter for a hot universe,” Phys. Lett. B 256 (1991) 17–21

1991
[47]

Gauge-flation: Inflation From Non-Abelian Gauge Fields,

A. Maleknejad and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Gauge-flation: Inflation From Non-Abelian Gauge Fields,” Phys. Lett. B 723 (2013) 224–228, arXiv:1102.1513 [hep-ph]

2013 arXiv
[48]

Gauge-flation and Cosmic No-Hair Conjecture,

A. Maleknejad, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and J. Soda, “Gauge-flation and Cosmic No-Hair Conjecture,” JCAP 01 (2012) 016, arXiv:1109.5573 [hep-th]

2012 arXiv
[49]

How attractive is the isotropic attractor solution of axion-SU(2) inflation?,

I. Wolfson, A. Maleknejad, and E. Komatsu, “How attractive is the isotropic attractor solution of axion-SU(2) inflation?,” JCAP 09 (2020) 047, arXiv:2003.01617 [gr-qc]

2020 arXiv
[50]

Emerging chromo-natural inflation,

V. Domcke, B. Mares, F. Muia, and M. Pieroni, “Emerging chromo-natural inflation,” JCAP 04 (2019) 034, arXiv:1807.03358 [hep-ph]

2019 arXiv
[51]

The Different Regimes of Axion Gauge Field Inflation,

V. Domcke and S. Sandner, “The Different Regimes of Axion Gauge Field Inflation,” JCAP 09 (2019) 038, arXiv:1905.11372 [astro-ph.CO]

2019 arXiv
[52]

Nonlinear perturbations from axion-gauge fields dynamics during inflation,

A. Papageorgiou, M. Peloso, and C. Unal, “Nonlinear perturbations from axion-gauge fields dynamics during inflation,” JCAP 07 (2019) 004, arXiv:1904.01488 [astro-ph.CO]

2019 arXiv
[53]

Detection prospects of gravitational waves from SU(2) axion inflation,

C. Badger, H. Duval, T. Fujita, S. Kuroyanagi, A. Romero-Rodr´ ıguez, and M. Sakellariadou, “Detection prospects of gravitational waves from SU(2) axion inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 110 no. 8, (2024) 084063, arXiv:2406.11742 [astro-ph.CO]

2024 arXiv
[54]

Measuring a Parity Violation Signature in the Early Universe via Ground-based Laser Interferometers,

N. Seto and A. Taruya, “Measuring a Parity Violation Signature in the Early Universe via Ground-based Laser Interferometers,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 121101, arXiv:0707.0535 [astro-ph]. – 32 –

2007 arXiv
[55]

Sensitivity to a Frequency-Dependent Circular Polarization in an Isotropic Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background,

T. L. Smith and R. Caldwell, “Sensitivity to a Frequency-Dependent Circular Polarization in an Isotropic Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background,” Phys. Rev. D 95 no. 4, (2017) 044036, arXiv:1609.05901 [gr-qc]

2017 arXiv
[56]

Measuring the net circular polarization of the stochastic gravitational wave background with interferometers,

V. Domcke, J. Garcia-Bellido, M. Peloso, M. Pieroni, A. Ricciardone, L. Sorbo, and G. Tasinato, “Measuring the net circular polarization of the stochastic gravitational wave background with interferometers,” JCAP 05 (2020) 028, arXiv:1910.08052 [astro-ph.CO]

2020 arXiv
[57]

Axion-gauge dynamics during inflation as the origin of pulsar timing array signals and primordial black holes,

C. Unal, A. Papageorgiou, and I. Obata, “Axion-gauge dynamics during inflation as the origin of pulsar timing array signals and primordial black holes,” Phys. Lett. B 856 (2024) 138873, arXiv:2307.02322 [astro-ph.CO]

2024 arXiv
[58]

Naturally inflating on steep potentials through electromagnetic dissipation,

M. M. Anber and L. Sorbo, “Naturally inflating on steep potentials through electromagnetic dissipation,” Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 043534, arXiv:0908.4089 [hep-th]

2010 arXiv
[59]

Instability in axion inflation with strong backreaction from gauge modes,

M. Peloso and L. Sorbo, “Instability in axion inflation with strong backreaction from gauge modes,” arXiv:2209.08131 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[60]

Axion inflation in the strong-backreaction regime: decay of the Anber-Sorbo solution,

R. von Eckardstein, M. Peloso, K. Schmitz, O. Sobol, and L. Sorbo, “Axion inflation in the strong-backreaction regime: decay of the Anber-Sorbo solution,” JHEP 11 (2023) 183, arXiv:2309.04254 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[61]

Lattice simulations of axion-U(1) inflation,

A. Caravano, E. Komatsu, K. D. Lozanov, and J. Weller, “Lattice simulations of axion-U(1) inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 108 no. 4, (2023) 043504, arXiv:2204.12874 [astro-ph.CO]

2023 arXiv
[62]

Strong Backreaction Regime in Axion Inflation,

D. G. Figueroa, J. Lizarraga, A. Urio, and J. Urrestilla, “Strong Backreaction Regime in Axion Inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 no. 15, (2023) 151003, arXiv:2303.17436 [astro-ph.CO]

2023 arXiv
[63]

Unveiling the nonlinear dynamics of a rolling axion during inflation,

A. Caravano and M. Peloso, “Unveiling the nonlinear dynamics of a rolling axion during inflation,” arXiv:2407.13405 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[64]

Nonlinear dynamics of axion inflation: A detailed lattice study,

D. G. Figueroa, J. Lizarraga, N. Loayza, A. Urio, and J. Urrestilla, “Nonlinear dynamics of axion inflation: A detailed lattice study,” Phys. Rev. D 111 no. 6, (2025) 063545, arXiv:2411.16368 [astro-ph.CO]

2025
[65]

Lattice simulations of axion-U(1) inflation: gravitational waves, magnetic fields, and scalar statistics,

R. Sharma, A. Brandenburg, K. Subramanian, and A. Vikman, “Lattice simulations of axion-U(1) inflation: gravitational waves, magnetic fields, and scalar statistics,” arXiv:2411.04854 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[66]

Backreaction of axion-SU(2) dynamics during inflation,

O. Iarygina, E. I. Sfakianakis, R. Sharma, and A. Brandenburg, “Backreaction of axion-SU(2) dynamics during inflation,” JCAP 04 (2024) 018, arXiv:2311.07557 [astro-ph.CO]

2024 arXiv
[67]

A novel PBH production mechanism from non-Abelian gauge fields during inflation,

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, and A. Papageorgiou, “A novel PBH production mechanism from non-Abelian gauge fields during inflation,” arXiv:2403.13581 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[68]

Gravity waves and non-Gaussian features from particle production in a sector gravitationally coupled to the inflaton,

N. Barnaby, J. Moxon, R. Namba, M. Peloso, G. Shiu, et al., “Gravity waves and non-Gaussian features from particle production in a sector gravitationally coupled to the inflaton,” Phys.Rev. D86 (2012) 103508, arXiv:1206.6117 [astro-ph.CO]

2012 arXiv
[69]

Blue Tensor Spectrum from Particle Production during Inflation,

S. Mukohyama, R. Namba, M. Peloso, and G. Shiu, “Blue Tensor Spectrum from Particle Production during Inflation,” JCAP 08 (2014) 036, arXiv:1405.0346 [astro-ph.CO]

2014 arXiv
[70]

Scale-dependent gravitational waves from a rolling axion,

R. Namba, M. Peloso, M. Shiraishi, L. Sorbo, and C. Unal, “Scale-dependent gravitational waves from a rolling axion,” JCAP 1601 no. 01, (2016) 041, arXiv:1509.07521 [astro-ph.CO]

2016 arXiv
[71]

Gravitational waves at interferometer scales and primordial black holes in axion inflation,

J. Garcia-Bellido, M. Peloso, and C. Unal, “Gravitational waves at interferometer scales and primordial black holes in axion inflation,” JCAP 1612 no. 12, (2016) 031, arXiv:1610.03763 [astro-ph.CO]. – 33 –

2016 arXiv
[72]

Chiral primordial Chiral primordial gravitational waves from dilaton induced delayed chromonatural inflation,

CLEO Collaboration, I. Obata and J. Soda, “Chiral primordial Chiral primordial gravitational waves from dilaton induced delayed chromonatural inflation,” Phys. Rev. D93 no. 12, (2016) 123502, arXiv:1602.06024 [hep-th] . [Addendum: Phys. Rev.D95,no.10,109903(2017)]

2016 arXiv
[73]

Primordial Gravitational Waves from Axion-Gauge Fields Dynamics,

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, and T. Fujita, “Primordial Gravitational Waves from Axion-Gauge Fields Dynamics,” JCAP 01 (2017) 019, arXiv:1608.04216 [astro-ph.CO]

2017 arXiv
[74]

Large tensor non-Gaussianity from axion-gauge field dynamics,

A. Agrawal, T. Fujita, and E. Komatsu, “Large tensor non-Gaussianity from axion-gauge field dynamics,” Phys. Rev. D 97 no. 10, (2018) 103526, arXiv:1707.03023 [astro-ph.CO]

2018 arXiv
[75]

Finding the chiral gravitational wave background of an axion-SU(2) inflationary model using CMB observations and laser interferometers,

B. Thorne, T. Fujita, M. Hazumi, N. Katayama, E. Komatsu, and M. Shiraishi, “Finding the chiral gravitational wave background of an axion-SU(2) inflationary model using CMB observations and laser interferometers,” Phys. Rev. D 97 no. 4, (2018) 043506, arXiv:1707.03240 [astro-ph.CO]

2018 arXiv
[76]

Does the detection of primordial gravitational waves exclude low energy inflation?,

T. Fujita, R. Namba, and Y. Tada, “Does the detection of primordial gravitational waves exclude low energy inflation?,” Phys. Lett. B 778 (2018) 17–21, arXiv:1705.01533 [astro-ph.CO]

2018 arXiv
[77]

Non-Gaussianity of Inflationary Gravitational Waves from the Field Equation,

A. Agrawal, “Non-Gaussianity of Inflationary Gravitational Waves from the Field Equation,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 28 no. 02, (2018) 1950036, arXiv:1804.01481 [astro-ph.CO]

2018 arXiv
[78]

Non-Gaussianity from Axion-Gauge Fields Interactions during Inflation,

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, R. J. Hardwick, H. Assadullahi, K. Koyama, and D. Wands, “Non-Gaussianity from Axion-Gauge Fields Interactions during Inflation,” JCAP 11 (2018) 029, arXiv:1806.05474 [astro-ph.CO]

2018 arXiv
[79]

Mixed Non-Gaussianity from Axion-Gauge Field Dynamics,

T. Fujita, R. Namba, and I. Obata, “Mixed Non-Gaussianity from Axion-Gauge Field Dynamics,” JCAP 04 (2019) 044, arXiv:1811.12371 [astro-ph.CO]

2019 arXiv
[80]

Effects of Gravitational Chern-Simons during Axion-SU(2) Inflation,

L. Mirzagholi, E. Komatsu, K. D. Lozanov, and Y. Watanabe, “Effects of Gravitational Chern-Simons during Axion-SU(2) Inflation,” JCAP 06 (2020) 024, arXiv:2003.05931 [gr-qc]

2020 arXiv
[81]

Gravitational waves from spectator Gauge-flation,

O. Iarygina and E. I. Sfakianakis, “Gravitational waves from spectator Gauge-flation,” JCAP 11 no. 11, (2021) 023, arXiv:2105.06972 [hep-th]

2021 arXiv
[82]

Gravitational wave trispectrum in the axion-SU(2) model,

T. Fujita, K. Murai, I. Obata, and M. Shiraishi, “Gravitational wave trispectrum in the axion-SU(2) model,” JCAP 01 no. 01, (2022) 007, arXiv:2109.06457 [astro-ph.CO]

2022 arXiv
[83]

Dark radiation in spectator axion–gauge models,

M. Kakizaki, M. Ogata, and O. Seto, “Dark radiation in spectator axion–gauge models,” PTEP 2022 no. 3, (2022) 033E02, arXiv:2110.12936 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[84]

Axion-gauge field dynamics with backreaction,

K. Ishiwata, E. Komatsu, and I. Obata, “Axion-gauge field dynamics with backreaction,” JCAP 03 no. 03, (2022) 010, arXiv:2111.14429 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[85]

The inflated Chern-Simons number in spectator chromo-natural inflation,

H. Bagherian, M. Reece, and W. L. Xu, “The inflated Chern-Simons number in spectator chromo-natural inflation,” JHEP 01 (2023) 099, arXiv:2207.11262 [hep-th]

2023 arXiv
[86]

CMB spectral distortions from enhanced primordial perturbations: the role of spectator axions,

M. Putti, N. Bartolo, S. Bhattacharya, and M. Peloso, “CMB spectral distortions from enhanced primordial perturbations: the role of spectator axions,” arXiv:2403.08594 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[87]

Magnetogenesis from axion-SU(2) inflation,

A. Brandenburg, O. Iarygina, E. I. Sfakianakis, and R. Sharma, “Magnetogenesis from axion-SU(2) inflation,” JCAP 12 (2024) 057, arXiv:2408.17413 [astro-ph.CO]

2024 arXiv
[88]

String Axiverse,

A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper, and J. March-Russell, “String Axiverse,” Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 123530, arXiv:0905.4720 [hep-th]

2010 arXiv
[89]

An M Theory Solution to the Strong CP Problem and Constraints on the Axiverse,

B. S. Acharya, K. Bobkov, and P. Kumar, “An M Theory Solution to the Strong CP Problem and Constraints on the Axiverse,” JHEP 11 (2010) 105, arXiv:1004.5138 [hep-th]

2010 arXiv
[90]

The type IIB string axiverse and its low-energy phenomenology,

M. Cicoli, M. Goodsell, and A. Ringwald, “The type IIB string axiverse and its low-energy phenomenology,” JHEP 1210 (2012) 146, arXiv:1206.0819 [hep-th] . – 34 –

2012 arXiv
[91]

The Kreuzer-Skarke Axiverse,

M. Demirtas, C. Long, L. McAllister, and M. Stillman, “The Kreuzer-Skarke Axiverse,” JHEP 04 (2020) 138, arXiv:1808.01282 [hep-th]

2020 arXiv
[92]

PQ axiverse,

M. Demirtas, N. Gendler, C. Long, L. McAllister, and J. Moritz, “PQ axiverse,” JHEP 06 (2023) 092, arXiv:2112.04503 [hep-th]

2023 arXiv
[93]

Double Monodromy Inflation: A Gravity Waves Factory for CMB-S4, LiteBIRD and LISA,

G. D’Amico, N. Kaloper, and A. Westphal, “Double Monodromy Inflation: A Gravity Waves Factory for CMB-S4, LiteBIRD and LISA,” Phys. Rev. D 104 no. 8, (2021) L081302, arXiv:2101.05861 [hep-th]

2021 arXiv
[94]

General double monodromy inflation,

G. D’Amico, N. Kaloper, and A. Westphal, “General double monodromy inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 105 no. 10, (2022) 103527, arXiv:2112.13861 [hep-th]

2022 arXiv
[95]

Gauge field production and Schwinger reheating in runaway axion inflation,

S. Hashiba, K. Kamada, and H. Nakatsuka, “Gauge field production and Schwinger reheating in runaway axion inflation,” JCAP 04 no. 04, (2022) 058, arXiv:2110.10822 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[96]

Deflationary universe scenario,

B. Spokoiny, “Deflationary universe scenario,” Phys. Lett. B 315 (1993) 40–45, arXiv:gr-qc/9306008

1993 arXiv
[97]

Quintessential inflation,

P. J. E. Peebles and A. Vilenkin, “Quintessential inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 063505, arXiv:astro-ph/9810509

1999 arXiv
[98]

A Planar Diagram Theory for Strong Interactions,

G. ’t Hooft, “A Planar Diagram Theory for Strong Interactions,” Nucl. Phys. B 72 (1974) 461

1974
[99]

Large N Chiral Dynamics,

E. Witten, “Large N Chiral Dynamics,” Annals Phys. 128 (1980) 363

1980
[100]

Theta dependence in the large N limit of four-dimensional gauge theories,

E. Witten, “Theta dependence in the large N limit of four-dimensional gauge theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 2862–2865, arXiv:hep-th/9807109

1998 arXiv
[101]

ALP dark matter with non-periodic potentials: parametric resonance, halo formation and gravitational signatures,

A. Chatrchyan, C. Er¨ oncel, M. Koschnitzke, and G. Servant, “ALP dark matter with non-periodic potentials: parametric resonance, halo formation and gravitational signatures,” JCAP 10 (2023) 068, arXiv:2305.03756 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[102]

Improved Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season,

BICEP, Keck Collaboration, P. A. R. Ade et al., “Improved Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 no. 15, (2021) 151301, arXiv:2110.00483 [astro-ph.CO]

2021
[103]

Numerical study of pseudoscalar inflation with an axion-gauge field coupling,

S.-L. Cheng, W. Lee, and K.-W. Ng, “Numerical study of pseudoscalar inflation with an axion-gauge field coupling,” Phys. Rev. D 93 no. 6, (2016) 063510, arXiv:1508.00251 [astro-ph.CO]

2016 arXiv
[104]

Dissipative Axial Inflation,

A. Notari and K. Tywoniuk, “Dissipative Axial Inflation,” JCAP 12 (2016) 038, arXiv:1608.06223 [hep-th]

2016 arXiv
[105]

Warm dark energy,

G. Dall’Agata, S. Gonz´ alez-Mart´ ın, A. Papageorgiou, and M. Peloso, “Warm dark energy,”JCAP 08 (2020) 032, arXiv:1912.09950 [hep-th]

2020 arXiv
[106]

A flashing beacon in axion inflation: recurring bursts of gravitational waves in the strong backreaction regime,

J. Garcia-Bellido, A. Papageorgiou, M. Peloso, and L. Sorbo, “A flashing beacon in axion inflation: recurring bursts of gravitational waves in the strong backreaction regime,” JCAP 01 (2024) 034, arXiv:2303.13425 [astro-ph.CO]

2024 arXiv
[107]

Backreaction of electromagnetic fields and the Schwinger effect in pseudoscalar inflation magnetogenesis,

O. O. Sobol, E. V. Gorbar, and S. I. Vilchinskii, “Backreaction of electromagnetic fields and the Schwinger effect in pseudoscalar inflation magnetogenesis,” Phys. Rev. D 100 no. 6, (2019) 063523, arXiv:1907.10443 [astro-ph.CO]

2019 arXiv
[108]

Resonant backreaction in axion inflation,

V. Domcke, V. Guidetti, Y. Welling, and A. Westphal, “Resonant backreaction in axion inflation,” JCAP 09 (2020) 009, arXiv:2002.02952 [astro-ph.CO] . – 35 –

2020 arXiv
[109]

Gauge-field production during axion inflation in the gradient expansion formalism,

E. V. Gorbar, K. Schmitz, O. O. Sobol, and S. I. Vilchinskii, “Gauge-field production during axion inflation in the gradient expansion formalism,” Phys. Rev. D 104 no. 12, (2021) 123504, arXiv:2109.01651 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[110]

Perturbatively including inhomogeneities in axion inflation,

V. Domcke, Y. Ema, and S. Sandner, “Perturbatively including inhomogeneities in axion inflation,” JCAP 03 (2024) 019, arXiv:2310.09186 [astro-ph.CO]

2024 arXiv
[111]

Primordial black holes from α-attractors,

I. Dalianis, A. Kehagias, and G. Tringas, “Primordial black holes from α-attractors,” JCAP 01 (2019) 037, arXiv:1805.09483 [astro-ph.CO]

2019 arXiv
[112]

SIGWfast: a python package for the computation of scalar-induced gravitational wave spectra,

L. T. Witkowski, “SIGWfast: a python package for the computation of scalar-induced gravitational wave spectra,” arXiv:2209.05296 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv
[113]

Cosmological backgrounds of gravitational waves,

C. Caprini and D. G. Figueroa, “Cosmological backgrounds of gravitational waves,” Classical and Quantum Gravity 35 no. 16, (July, 2018) 163001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/aac608

2018 doi
[114]

Prospects for detecting anisotropies and polarization of the stochastic gravitational wave background with ground-based detectors,

G. Mentasti, C. Contaldi, and M. Peloso, “Prospects for detecting anisotropies and polarization of the stochastic gravitational wave background with ground-based detectors,” JCAP 08 (2023) 053, arXiv:2304.06640 [gr-qc]

2023 arXiv
[116]

On the validity of the perturbative description of axions during inflation,

R. Z. Ferreira, J. Ganc, J. Nore˜ na, and M. S. Sloth, “On the validity of the perturbative description of axions during inflation,” JCAP 04 (2016) 039, arXiv:1512.06116 [astro-ph.CO] . [Erratum: JCAP 10, E01 (2016)]

2016 arXiv
[117]

Rolling axions during inflation: perturbativity and signatures,

M. Peloso, L. Sorbo, and C. Unal, “Rolling axions during inflation: perturbativity and signatures,” JCAP 09 (2016) 001, arXiv:1606.00459 [astro-ph.CO]

2016 arXiv
[118]

Gravitational wave forest from string axiverse,

N. Kitajima, J. Soda, and Y. Urakawa, “Gravitational wave forest from string axiverse,” JCAP 10 (2018) 008, arXiv:1807.07037 [astro-ph.CO]

2018 arXiv
[119]

Gauge fields and inflation: Chiral gravitational waves, fluctuations, and the Lyth bound,

P. Adshead, E. Martinec, and M. Wyman, “Gauge fields and inflation: Chiral gravitational waves, fluctuations, and the Lyth bound,” Phys. Rev. D88 no. 2, (2013) 021302, arXiv:1301.2598 [hep-th]. – 36 –

2013 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [115]

A universal constraint on axion non-Abelian dynamics during inflation,

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, M. Michelotti, and O. ¨Ozsoy, “A universal constraint on axion non-Abelian dynamics during inflation,” JCAP 03 (2025) 007, arXiv:2405.17411 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2025

[2] [1]

Alternatives to the inflationary paradigm of structure formation,

R. H. Brandenberger, “Alternatives to the inflationary paradigm of structure formation,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. Conf. Ser. 01 (2011) 67–79, arXiv:0902.4731 [hep-th]

arXiv 2011

[3] [2]

Particle physics models of inflation and the cosmological density perturbation,

D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto, “Particle physics models of inflation and the cosmological density perturbation,” Phys. Rept. 314 (1999) 1–146, arXiv:hep-ph/9807278

arXiv 1999

[4] [3]

Did LIGO detect dark matter?,

S. Bird, I. Cholis, J. B. Mu˜ noz, Y. Ali-Ha¨ ımoud, M. Kamionkowski, E. D. Kovetz, A. Raccanelli, and A. G. Riess, “Did LIGO detect dark matter?,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 no. 20, (2016) 201301, arXiv:1603.00464 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2016

[5] [4]

Baumann and L

D. Baumann and L. McAllister, Inflation and String Theory . Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 5, 2015. arXiv:1404.2601 [hep-th]

arXiv 2015

[6] [5]

The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts,

Simons Observatory Collaboration, P. Ade et al., “The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts,” JCAP 02 (2019) 056, arXiv:1808.07445 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2019

[7] [6]

CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition,

CMB-S4 Collaboration, K. N. Abazajian et al., “CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition,” arXiv:1610.02743 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv

[8] [7]

Snowmass 2021 CMB-S4 White Paper,

CMB-S4 Collaboration, K. Abazajian et al., “Snowmass 2021 CMB-S4 White Paper,” arXiv:2203.08024 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2021