Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 5 cited by

WI2easy: warm inflation dynamics made easy

T0 review · 2 major / 6 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 A new code computes warm inflation's full perturbation spectra with a deterministic Fokker-Planck equation, replacing stochastic ensemble averaging.

desk verdict Useful code paper whose FP-based observables actually go through the usual G(Q)-corrected proxy; worth refereeing, with a request for a direct cross-check against an existing stochastic solver. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.17760 v2 pith:ONUH3HXM submitted 2025-04-24 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-phhep-th

Gabriel S. Rodrigues , Rudnei O. Ramos This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.COgr-qchep-phhep-th
keywords warminflationFokker-PlanckcurvaturepowerspectrumdissipationcoefficientG(Q)CMBobservablesMathematicapackage
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 presents WI2easy, a Mathematica package that computes the full background evolution and curvature perturbation spectra of warm inflation for arbitrary single-field potentials $V(\phi)$ and dissipation coefficients $\Upsilon(T,\phi)$. Its central move is to replace stochastic Langevin simulations of the coupled inflaton-radiation perturbation system by a deterministic Fokker-Planck moment equation, so that the power spectrum $\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal{R}}(k)$ and the derived observables $n_s$, $r$, and $\alpha_s$ are obtained from one coupled ordinary differential system. The paper shows the code reproduces known results from earlier stochastic codes and fitting functions, and it documents how the correction function $G(Q)$ behaves when thermal inflaton fluctuations and the radiation noise term are included or excluded. A sympathetic reader would care because this makes model-by-model confrontation of warm inflation with CMB data routine rather than a numerical tour de force.

What carries the argument

The central object is a four-component perturbation vector $\Phi=(\delta\phi,\,d\delta\phi/dN_e,\,\delta\rho_r,\,\Psi_r)^T$. The stochastic system is written as $d\Phi/dN_e + A\Phi = B\xi$, and instead of averaging over $\xi$ WI2easy evolves $J=\langle\Phi\Phi^\dagger\rangle$ through $dJ/dN_e = -A\cdot J - J\cdot A^T + B\cdot B^T$, with the matrices $A$, $B$, and $C$ read from the uniform-curvature-gauge perturbation equations. The function $G(Q)$ is defined as $\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal{R}}^{\rm numerical}/\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal{R}}^{\rm analytic}$ and is interpolated directly from generated data. The code's options to include thermal inflaton fluctuations (through the Bose-Einstein occupation $n_{BE}$) and the radiation noise term are implemented as switchable choices in the same mechanical framework.

What would settle it

Run the original Langevin system (3.13)-(3.15) for a benchmark case such as the quartic potential with $\Upsilon\propto T$ at $Q=0.1$, average over many noise realizations, and compare the ensemble power spectrum with WI2easy's deterministic result; any difference beyond numerical tolerance would show the moment equation is not equivalent. Repeating the same comparison at $Q\gtrsim 100$ tests the regime where the radiation noise term changes the spectrum's shape.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

WI2easy claims that the full warm-inflation perturbation problem—the coupled stochastic equations for the inflaton fluctuation $\delta\phi$, its $N_e$-derivative, the radiation density fluctuation $\delta\rho_r$, and the radiation momentum perturbation $\Psi_r$—can be replaced by one deterministic matrix differential equation for the two-point correlation matrix $J=\langle\Phi\Phi^\dagger\rangle$, namely $dJ/dN_e = -A\cdot J - J\cdot A^T + B\cdot B^T$. Solving this Fokker-Planck moment equation together with the background equations yields the scalar curvature power spectrum $\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal{R}}(k)$, the tilt $n_s$, the tensor-to-scalar ratio $r$, and the running $\alpha_s$ for any single-field potential and dissipation coefficient. The code determines the potential normalization from the Planck amplitude at the pivot scale, and it produces the correction function $G(Q)$—the ratio of the numerical spectrum to the analytic proxy spectrum—by spline interpolation of raw data rather than through a fitting formula. Its numerical results match the earlier stochastic code and the most recent $G(Q)$ fits, and they show that the common assumption of a universal $G(Q)$ across potentials breaks down once the radiation noise term is included.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the deterministic moment equation (3.31) is exactly equivalent to the ensemble statistics of the original stochastic perturbation equations, including the multi-noise identity used for the noise amplitude in eq. (A.5); the paper relies on earlier references and reports a numerical check without presenting it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Observables like $n_s$, $r$, and $\alpha_s$ can be computed directly from the background and perturbation equations for any defined potential and dissipation coefficient, with the potential normalization fixed by the Planck amplitude at the pivot scale.
  • The $G(Q)$ correction is generated internally from raw data, so users no longer need to rely on fitting functions calibrated for specific regimes or dissipation forms.
  • The code reproduces the earlier stochastic results in the weak- and strong-dissipation limits and matches the most recent $G(Q)$ fits, while also showing that earlier fits underestimate $G(Q)$ for $Q \gtrsim 50$.
  • Because the computation is deterministic, systematic scans over $Q$ (and hence over the dissipation strength $C_\Upsilon$) become fast enough to confront models with current and future CMB data.
  • Including the radiation noise term breaks the potential-universality of $G(Q)$, so precision comparisons require model-by-model evaluation rather than a universal correction.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the Fokker-Planck moment equation is exactly equivalent to the stochastic system, then previously published warm-inflation parameter constraints that used fitting-function forms of $G(Q)$ could shift in the strong-dissipation regime, where the older fits are known to deviate.
  • The same moment-equation machinery should carry over to multi-field warm inflation and to higher-order statistics, since the equation for second moments can be extended to higher correlators; the paper lists these as planned extensions, not achieved results.
  • A practical consequence of the deterministic formulation is that dense scans over microphysical coupling constants become cheap, making it feasible to map out the full observationally allowed region of a given warm-inflation model.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents WI2easy, a Mathematica package for computing warm-inflation background dynamics and curvature perturbation power spectra. The code solves the deterministic Fokker-Planck moment equation (3.31) for J = <Phi Phi^dagger> rather than integrating the stochastic Langevin system (3.13)-(3.15), following refs. [40,41]. It supports arbitrary single-field potentials and dissipation coefficients, with user options for thermalized (n_BE) and nonthermal inflaton fluctuations and for including the radiation noise term. The package generates initial conditions, evaluates G(Q) from eq. (3.2), normalizes the potential to the Planck amplitude, and outputs P_R(k), n_s, r, and alpha_s. Results are shown for quartic, fibre, axion, hilltop, and hybrid potentials with dissipation coefficients proportional to T, T^3, and T^3/phi^2; comparisons with previous G(Q) fits are given in Fig. 5, and observables for a quartic model with a linear-in-T dissipation coefficient are displayed in Figs. 6-9.

Significance. If the central equivalence is correct, WI2easy is a useful community tool: the deterministic formulation avoids ensemble averaging, the appendix fully specifies the matrix elements entering the solver, and the package is publicly available. The comparison in Fig. 5 reproduces previous G(Q) results in the no-radiation-noise thermal case, and the exploration of radiation-noise effects on the universality of G(Q) is a physically interesting result. The main risk is that the Fokker-Planck moment truncation and the multi-noise amplitude in eq. (A.5) are asserted rather than independently validated in the regimes in which the code makes new predictions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 3, Eq. (3.31); Appendix A, Eqs. (A.4)-(A.6); footnote 13] The central methodological claim is that the deterministic Fokker-Planck moment equation (3.31), with matrix elements (A.4)-(A.6), exactly reproduces the ensemble-averaged power spectrum of the stochastic system (3.13)-(3.15). This equivalence is not demonstrated in the manuscript: it is imported from refs. [40,41], and the multi-noise combination used in b2 of eq. (A.5) is asserted in footnote 13 to have been 'explicitly verified numerically' with an auxiliary Langevin code, but no result of that verification is shown. Because every derived observable (G(Q), P_R(k), n_s, r, alpha_s) flows from J=<Phi Phi^dagger>, an error in A, B, or C would shift all quoted spectra in a way that internal consistency checks against fitting functions might not reveal. Please include either a derivation, a reproducible numerical cross-check against an independent stochastic solver for at least one configuration with the radiation-noise option and one with n_BE != 0, or the auxiliary Langevin verification material itself.
  2. [Sec. 6.2, Fig. 5] The validation of the code's G(Q) against WarmSPy and earlier fitting functions is restricted to the configuration in which those fits were calibrated: thermal inflaton fluctuations (n* = n_BE) and no radiation noise. The genuinely new options advertised by WI2easy - inclusion of the radiation noise term in eq. (3.14) and nonthermal inflaton fluctuations - are exactly the regimes in which no external comparison is shown. Consequently, the claims about universality breaking (Figs. 3 and 4) rest on the unverified Fokker-Planck implementation. A direct stochastic-solver comparison for at least one model with radiation noise and for one with n* = 0 would close this gap; without it, the new-regime results should be presented as preliminary.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 5] The text 'supesymmetry' should read 'supersymmetry'.
  2. [Sec. 6.1] The phrase 'northermal inflaton fluctuations' appears to be a typo for 'nonthermal inflaton fluctuations'.
  3. [Secs. 4.2.2-4.2.3] The notation 'e-efolds' is used in places; please standardize to 'e-folds'.
  4. [Fig. 5 legend] The legend entries 'fit linear T 1610.08758' and 'fit cubic T 2306.16190' are not self-explanatory; please label them with the corresponding reference numbers (e.g., ref. [11] and ref. [39]) in the caption.
  5. [Secs. 4.2.4 and 7] The claim of 'direct access to the power spectrum ... eliminating reliance on ad hoc approximations' should be qualified: the pipeline uses the analytical proxy, eq. (3.1), multiplied by the code-generated spline of G(Q), so the output is not independent of eq. (3.1).
  6. [Sec. 4.2.1] The interface field 'Relativistic degrees of fredom' contains a typo ('fredom' should be 'freedom').

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: WI2easy's G(Q) is a numerical output used as a transfer function, the final spectrum is anchored to the code's own numerical solution, and the Fokker-Planck method is imported from external references; the only self-citations are non-load-bearing scaffolds.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The background system (2.2)-(2.5) and the perturbation system (3.13)-(3.22) are taken from the published warm-inflation literature, and the deterministic Fokker-Planck moment equation (3.31) is adopted from refs. [40,41], whose authors are not the present authors; the central methodological premise is therefore an external citation, not a self-imported result. The function G(Q) is defined in eq. (3.2) as the ratio of the code's own numerical power spectrum to the analytic proxy (3.1) from ref. [30]. Although ref. [30] is a self-citation by R.O. Ramos, it is only a normalization scaffold: the final spectrum used in ObservationsWI multiplies a spline of G by that same proxy, which returns the numerical spectrum by construction at the sampled Q values. Thus the reported observables (ns, r, alpha_s) are outputs of the code's numerical integration, not of a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The only fitted external quantity is V0, calibrated to the Planck amplitude As, which is standard CMB normalization. The paper also compares its G(Q) against WarmSPy (ref. [39]) and earlier fits, providing external benchmarks. The genuine open issues are validation gaps rather than circularity: the equivalence of eq. (3.31) to the stochastic system is asserted from refs. [40,41], and footnote 13 states that the multi-noise identity was 'explicitly verified numerically, using an auxiliary Langevin code' without presenting that verification. These are reproducibility and correctness concerns, not instances of circular reasoning, and under the stated rules should not raise the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central computation rests on the standard warm inflation background and perturbation equations, the Fokker-Planck moment equation taken from refs. [40,41], and the slow-roll initial-condition relations. The only parameter fitted to external data is the potential amplitude V0, calibrated to the CMB scalar amplitude. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • V0 (potential amplitude normalization) = e.g., V0/M_Pl^4 about 3.20e-15 for the quartic plus linear-T example
    Adjusted in ObservationsWI so that the scalar power spectrum amplitude equals the Planck value As about 2.105e-9 at the pivot scale (Section 4.2.4). This is a standard amplitude calibration, not a prediction.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Warm inflation background equations (2.2)-(2.4) with radiation bath described by rho_r = (pi^2 g* /30) T^4
    Standard WI framework; assumed throughout the paper.
  • domain assumption Perturbation equations (3.13)-(3.15) with gauge-ready variables from refs. [37,38]
    Full coupled inflaton-radiation perturbation system; taken from previous work.
  • domain assumption Fokker-Planck moment equation dJ/dNe = -A.J - J.A^T + B.B^T is equivalent to the matrix Langevin system (3.26)
    Adopted from refs. [40,41]; no proof given in this paper.
  • domain assumption Multiple-noise identity for b2 in eq. (A.5), verified only numerically according to footnote 13
    The paper claims explicit numerical verification with an auxiliary Langevin code, but the verification is not presented.
  • domain assumption Slow-roll attractor relations (2.6)-(2.8) used to set initial conditions
    Used in FindICs and ObservationsWI; standard slow-roll approximation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of WI2easy: warm inflation dynamics made easy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ONUH3HXM

@misc{pith2026250417760,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: WI2easy: warm inflation dynamics made easy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ONUH3HXM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.17760}
}
read the original abstract

We present WI2easy, a Mathematica package for high-precision analysis of warm inflation (WI) dynamics, enabling efficient computation of both background evolution and curvature perturbations. Designed with a user-friendly interface, the tool supports a broad spectrum of inflaton potentials--including large-field, small-field, and hybrid models--and accommodates arbitrary dissipation coefficients dependent on temperature, field amplitude, or both, encompassing canonical forms prevalent in WI studies. Users can define custom models through intuitive commands, generating full dynamical trajectories and perturbation spectra in a streamlined workflow. This facilitates rapid confrontation of theoretical predictions with observational constraints, empowering systematic exploration of WI parameter spaces. WI2easy bridges the gap between theoretical models and observational cosmology, offering a robust, adaptable framework for next-generation inflationary analyses.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Phase Transitions and Gravitational Wave Production at the End of Thermal Inflation

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    The end of thermal inflation proceeds by nucleating true-vacuum bubbles rather than by global phase mixing, and the resulting gravitational-wave background can reach BBO and DECIGO sensitivities for low flaton mass sc...

  2. Warm multi natural inflation

    hep-ph 2025-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In warm multi-natural inflation with a cubic temperature dissipation coefficient, the curvature power spectrum grows sharply after the weak-to-strong dissipation transition, generating detectable scalar-induced gravit...

  3. Behaviour of $\alpha$-attractors in Warm Inflation

    astro-ph.CO 2025-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    In strongly dissipative warm inflation, T, E, and polynomial alpha-attractor models lose the cold-inflation attractor convergence in the n_s-r plane.

  4. Warming up the Fibres

    hep-th 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    All four fibre inflation potentials are claimed to agree with CMB observations under warm inflation, and strong dissipation can shrink the inflaton field excursion below the Planck scale.

  5. Viability of warm inflation with standard model interactions

    hep-ph 2025-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Using the WI2easy code, the Standard Model gluon-coupled warm inflation model remains viable, with a Hubble-exit dissipation ratio Q* between 0.0076 and 30 and inflaton thermalization for Q* above about 0.08.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · cited by 5 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Berera and L

    A. Berera and L. Z. Fang, Thermally induced density perturbations in the inflation era, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995), 1912-1915 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.1912 [arXiv:astro-ph/9501024 [astro-ph]]

    arXiv 1995

  2. [2]

    Berera, Warm inflation, Phys

    A. Berera, Warm inflation, Phys. Rev. Lett.75 (1995), 3218-3221 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.3218 [arXiv:astro-ph/9509049 [astro-ph]]

    arXiv 1995

  3. [3]

    Berera, Thermal properties of an inflationary universe, Phys

    A. Berera, Thermal properties of an inflationary universe, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996), 2519-2534 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.54.2519 [arXiv:hep-th/9601134 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1996

  4. [4]

    Interpolating the Stage of Exponential Expansion in the Early Universe: a possible alternative with no reheating

    A. Berera, Interpolating the stage of exponential expansion in the early universe: A Possible alternative with no reheating, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997), 3346-3357 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.55.3346 [arXiv:hep-ph/9612239 [hep-ph]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 1997

  5. [5]

    Berera, M

    A. Berera, M. Gleiser and R. O. Ramos, A First principles warm inflation model that solves the cosmological horizon / flatness problems, Phys. Rev. Lett.83 (1999), 264-267 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.264 [arXiv:hep-ph/9809583 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 1999

  6. [6]

    Berera, I

    A. Berera, I. G. Moss and R. O. Ramos, Warm Inflation and its Microphysical Basis, Rept. Prog. Phys. 72 (2009), 026901 doi:10.1088/0034-4885/72/2/026901 [arXiv:0808.1855 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2009

  7. [7]

    Bastero-Gil and A

    M. Bastero-Gil and A. Berera, Warm inflation model building, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A24 (2009), 2207-2240 doi:10.1142/S0217751X09044206 [arXiv:0902.0521 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2009

  8. [8]

    Kamali, M

    V. Kamali, M. Motaharfar and R. O. Ramos, Recent Developments in Warm Inflation, Universe 9 (2023) no.3, 124 doi:10.3390/universe9030124 [arXiv:2302.02827 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2023

Show all 72 references
  1. [9]

    Berera, The Warm Inflation Story, Universe9 (2023) no.6, 272 doi:10.3390/universe9060272 [arXiv:2305.10879 [hep-ph]]

    A. Berera, The Warm Inflation Story, Universe9 (2023) no.6, 272 doi:10.3390/universe9060272 [arXiv:2305.10879 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Bartrum, M

    S. Bartrum, M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, R. Cerezo, R. O. Ramos and J. G. Rosa, The importance of being warm (during inflation), Phys. Lett. B732 (2014), 116-121 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.03.029 [arXiv:1307.5868 [hep-ph]]

    2014 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Benetti and R

    M. Benetti and R. O. Ramos, Warm inflation dissipative effects: predictions and constraints from the Planck data, Phys. Rev. D95 (2017) no.2, 023517 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.023517 [arXiv:1610.08758 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, R. O. Ramos and J. G. Rosa, Warm Little Inflaton, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) no.15, 151301 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.151301 [arXiv:1604.08838 [hep-ph]]

    2016 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Berera, Warm inflation at arbitrary adiabaticity: A Model, an existence proof for inflationary dynamics in quantum field theory, Nucl

    A. Berera, Warm inflation at arbitrary adiabaticity: A Model, an existence proof for inflationary dynamics in quantum field theory, Nucl. Phys. B585 (2000), 666-714 doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(00)00411-9 [arXiv:hep-ph/9904409 [hep-ph]]

    2000 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, R. O. Ramos and J. G. Rosa, Towards a reliable effective field theory of inflation, Phys. Lett. B813 (2021), 136055 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.136055 [arXiv:1907.13410 [hep-ph]]

    2021

  7. [15]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, I. G. Moss and R. O. Ramos, Theory of non-Gaussianity in warm inflation, JCAP 12 (2014), 008 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2014/12/008 [arXiv:1408.4391 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2014 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Mirbabayi and A

    M. Mirbabayi and A. Gruzinov, Shapes of non-Gaussianity in warm inflation, JCAP02 (2023), 012 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/02/012 [arXiv:2205.13227 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Das and R

    S. Das and R. O. Ramos, Running and Running of the Running of the Scalar Spectral Index in Warm Inflation, Universe9 (2023) no.2, 76 doi:10.3390/universe9020076 [arXiv:2212.13914 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Das, Warm Inflation in the light of Swampland Criteria, Phys

    S. Das, Warm Inflation in the light of Swampland Criteria, Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) no.6, 063514 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.063514 [arXiv:1810.05038 [hep-th]]. – 29 –

    2019 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Motaharfar, V

    M. Motaharfar, V. Kamali and R. O. Ramos, Warm inflation as a way out of the swampland, Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) no.6, 063513 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.063513 [arXiv:1810.02816 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    S. Das, G. Goswami and C. Krishnan, Swampland, axions, and minimal warm inflation, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) no.10, 103529 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.103529 [arXiv:1911.00323 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Berera and J

    A. Berera and J. R. Calderón, Trans-Planckian censorship and other swampland bothers addressed in warm inflation, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) no.12, 123530 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.123530 [arXiv:1910.10516 [hep-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Kamali, M

    V. Kamali, M. Motaharfar and R. O. Ramos, Warm brane inflation with an exponential potential: a consistent realization away from the swampland, Phys. Rev. D101 (2020) no.2, 023535 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.023535 [arXiv:1910.06796 [gr-qc]]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Berera, R

    A. Berera, R. Brandenberger, V. Kamali and R. Ramos, Thermal, trapped and chromo-natural inflation in light of the swampland criteria and the trans-Planckian censorship conjecture, Eur. Phys. J. C81 (2021) no.5, 452 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09240-3 [arXiv:2006.01902 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Das and R

    S. Das and R. O. Ramos, Runaway potentials in warm inflation satisfying the swampland conjectures, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) no.10, 103522 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.103522 [arXiv:2007.15268 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Brandenberger, V

    R. Brandenberger, V. Kamali and R. O. Ramos, Strengthening the de Sitter swampland conjecture in warm inflation, JHEP08 (2020), 127 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2020)127 [arXiv:2002.04925 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Motaharfar and R

    M. Motaharfar and R. O. Ramos, Dirac-Born-Infeld warm inflation realization in the strong dissipation regime, Phys. Rev. D104 (2021) no.4, 043522 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.043522 [arXiv:2105.01131 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [27]

    H. P. de Oliveira and R. O. Ramos, Dynamical system analysis for inflation with dissipation, Phys. Rev. D57 (1998), 741-749 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.57.741 [arXiv:gr-qc/9710093 [gr-qc]]

    1998 arXiv

  20. [28]

    A. N. Taylor and A. Berera, Perturbation spectra in the warm inflationary scenario, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000), 083517 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.083517 [arXiv:astro-ph/0006077 [astro-ph]]

    2000 arXiv

  21. [29]

    L. M. H. Hall, I. G. Moss and A. Berera, Scalar perturbation spectra from warm inflation, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004), 083525 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.083525 [arXiv:astro-ph/0305015 [astro-ph]]

    2004 arXiv

  22. [30]

    R. O. Ramos and L. A. da Silva, Power spectrum for inflation models with quantum and thermal noises, JCAP03 (2013), 032 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2013/03/032 [arXiv:1302.3544 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2013 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Gleiser and R

    M. Gleiser and R. O. Ramos, Microphysical approach to nonequilibrium dynamics of quantum fields, Phys. Rev. D50 (1994), 2441-2455 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.50.2441 [arXiv:hep-ph/9311278 [hep-ph]]

    1994 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Berera, M

    A. Berera, M. Gleiser and R. O. Ramos, Strong dissipative behavior in quantum field theory, Phys. Rev. D58 (1998), 123508 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.58.123508 [arXiv:hep-ph/9803394 [hep-ph]]

    1998 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera and R. O. Ramos, Dissipation coefficients from scalar and fermion quantum field interactions, JCAP09 (2011), 033 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2011/09/033 [arXiv:1008.1929 [hep-ph]]

    2011 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, R. O. Ramos and J. G. Rosa, General dissipation coefficient in low-temperature warm inflation, JCAP01 (2013), 016 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2013/01/016 [arXiv:1207.0445 [hep-ph]]. – 30 –

    2013 arXiv

  27. [35]

    K. V. Berghaus, P. W. Graham and D. E. Kaplan, Minimal Warm Inflation, JCAP03 (2020), 034 [erratum: JCAP 10 (2023), E02] doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/03/034 [arXiv:1910.07525 [hep-ph]]

    2020 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Graham and I

    C. Graham and I. G. Moss, Density fluctuations from warm inflation, JCAP07 (2009), 013 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2009/07/013 [arXiv:0905.3500 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2009 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera and R. O. Ramos, Shear viscous effects on the primordial power spectrum from warm inflation, JCAP07 (2011), 030 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2011/07/030 [arXiv:1106.0701 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2011 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, I. G. Moss and R. O. Ramos, Cosmological fluctuations of a random field and radiation fluid, JCAP05 (2014), 004 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2014/05/004 [arXiv:1401.1149 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2014 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Montefalcone, V

    G. Montefalcone, V. Aragam, L. Visinelli and K. Freese, WarmSPy: a numerical study of cosmological perturbations in warm inflation, JCAP01 (2024), 032 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/01/032 [arXiv:2306.16190 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Ballesteros, M

    G. Ballesteros, M. A. G. García, A. P. Rodríguez, M. Pierre and J. Rey, Primordial black holes and gravitational waves from dissipation during inflation, JCAP12 (2022), 006 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2022/12/006 [arXiv:2208.14978 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2022 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Ballesteros, A

    G. Ballesteros, A. Perez Rodriguez and M. Pierre, Monomial warm inflation revisited, JCAP 03 (2024), 003 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/03/003 [arXiv:2304.05978 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, R. O. Ramos and J. G. Rosa, Adiabatic out-of-equilibrium solutions to the Boltzmann equation in warm inflation, JHEP02 (2018), 063 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2018)063 [arXiv:1711.09023 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Mirbabayi, Loosely coupled particles in warm inflation, JCAP05 (2025), 067 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/05/067 [arXiv:2409.17927 [astro-ph.CO]]

    M. Mirbabayi, Loosely coupled particles in warm inflation, JCAP05 (2025), 067 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/05/067 [arXiv:2409.17927 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2025 arXiv

  36. [44]

    J. c. Hwang, Perturbations of the Robertson-Walker space - Multicomponent sources and generalized gravity, Astrophys. J.375 (1991), 443-462 doi:10.1086/170206

    1991 doi

  37. [45]

    J. c. Hwang and H. Noh, Cosmological perturbations with multiple fluids and fields, Class. Quant. Grav. 19 (2002), 527-550 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/19/3/308 [arXiv:astro-ph/0103244 [astro-ph]]

    2002 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Aghanim et al

    N. Aghanim et al. [Planck], Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020), A6 [erratum: Astron. Astrophys.652 (2021), C4] doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833910 [arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2020 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Calabrese et al

    E. Calabrese et al. [ACT], The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Constraints on Extended Cosmological Models, [arXiv:2503.14454 [astro-ph.CO]]

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    Cicoli, C

    M. Cicoli, C. P. Burgess and F. Quevedo, Fibre Inflation: Observable Gravity Waves from IIB String Compactifications, JCAP03 (2009), 013 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2009/03/013 [arXiv:0808.0691 [hep-th]]

    2009 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Cicoli and E

    M. Cicoli and E. Di Valentino, Fitting string inflation to real cosmological data: The fiber inflation case, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) no.4, 043521 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.043521 [arXiv:2004.01210 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2020 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Bhattacharya, K

    S. Bhattacharya, K. Dutta, M. R. Gangopadhyay, A. Maharana and K. Singh, Fibre Inflation and Precision CMB Data, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020), 123531 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.123531 [arXiv:2003.05969 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2020 arXiv

  43. [51]

    S. Bera, D. Chakraborty, G. K. Leontaris and P. Shukla, Global embedding of fiber inflation in a perturbative large volume scenario, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) no.10, 106009 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.106009 [arXiv:2406.01694 [hep-th]]. – 31 –

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Chakraborty and R

    D. Chakraborty and R. O. Ramos, Warming up the Fibres, JHEP09 (2025), 020 doi:10.1007/jhep09(2025)020 [arXiv:2505.04447 [hep-th]]

    2025 arXiv

  45. [53]

    A. D. Linde, Hybrid inflation, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994), 748-754 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.49.748 [arXiv:astro-ph/9307002 [astro-ph]]

    1994 arXiv

  46. [54]

    K. V. Berghaus, P. W. Graham, D. E. Kaplan, G. D. Moore and S. Rajendran, Dark energy radiation, Phys. Rev. D104 (2021) no.8, 083520 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.083520 [arXiv:2012.10549 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Drewes and S

    M. Drewes and S. Zell, On sphaleron heating in the presence of fermions, JCAP06 (2024), 038 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/06/038 [arXiv:2312.13739 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    K. V. Berghaus, M. Forslund and M. V. Guevarra, Warm inflation with a heavy QCD axion, JCAP 10 (2024), 103 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/10/103 [arXiv:2402.13535 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Laine and S

    M. Laine and S. Procacci, Minimal warm inflation with complete medium response, JCAP06 (2021), 031 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/06/031 [arXiv:2102.09913 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  50. [58]

    R. O. Ramos and G. S. Rodrigues, Viability of warm inflation with standard model interactions, Phys. Rev. D111 (2025) no.12, 123527 doi:10.1103/wn1m-19gt [arXiv:2504.20943 [hep-ph]]

    2025 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Arya, Formation of Primordial Black Holes from Warm Inflation, JCAP09 (2020), 042 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/09/042 [arXiv:1910.05238 [astro-ph.CO]]

    R. Arya, Formation of Primordial Black Holes from Warm Inflation, JCAP09 (2020), 042 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/09/042 [arXiv:1910.05238 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Bastero-Gil and M

    M. Bastero-Gil and M. S. Díaz-Blanco, Gravity waves and primordial black holes in scalar warm little inflation, JCAP12 (2021) no.12, 052 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/12/052 [arXiv:2105.08045 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Correa, M

    M. Correa, M. R. Gangopadhyay, N. Jaman and G. J. Mathews, Primordial black-hole dark matter via warm natural inflation, Phys. Lett. B835 (2022), 137510 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137510 [arXiv:2207.10394 [gr-qc]]

    2022

  54. [62]

    P. B. Ferraz and J. G. Rosa, The inflation trilogy and primordial black holes, JCAP03 (2025), 040 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/03/040 [arXiv:2410.10996 [hep-ph]]

    2025 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Ito and R

    A. Ito and R. O. Ramos, Warm multi-natural inflation, JCAP08 (2025), 076 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/076 [arXiv:2504.15606 [hep-ph]]

    2025 arXiv

  56. [64]

    P. A. R. Adeet al. [BICEP and Keck], Improved Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season, Phys. Rev. Lett.127 (2021) no.15, 151301 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.151301 [arXiv:2110.00483 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2021

  57. [65]

    Berera, S

    A. Berera, S. Brahma, Z. Qiu, R. O. Ramos and G. S. Rodrigues, The early universe is ACT-ing warm, [arXiv:2504.02655 [hep-th]]

  58. [66]

    Bastero-Gil, S

    M. Bastero-Gil, S. Bhattacharya, K. Dutta and M. R. Gangopadhyay, Constraining Warm Inflation with CMB data, JCAP02 (2018), 054 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2018/02/054 [arXiv:1710.10008 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2018 arXiv

  59. [67]

    R. Arya, A. Dasgupta, G. Goswami, J. Prasad and R. Rangarajan, Revisiting CMB constraints on warm inflation, JCAP02 (2018), 043 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2018/02/043 [arXiv:1710.11109 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2018 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Kumar and S

    U. Kumar and S. Das, A generalized method of constraining Warm Inflation with CMB data, JCAP 10 (2024), 058 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/10/058 [arXiv:2407.06032 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    F. B. M. d. Santos, R. de Souza and J. S. Alcaniz, A comparative analysis of dissipation coefficients in warm inflation, JCAP10 (2024), 071 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/10/071 [arXiv:2407.18891 [astro-ph.CO]]. – 32 –

    2024 arXiv

  62. [70]

    F. B. M. d. Santos, G. Rodrigues, R. de Souza and J. S. Alcaniz, Stage IV CMB forecasts for warm inflation, JCAP03 (2025), 062 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/03/062 [arXiv:2412.02696 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2025 arXiv

  63. [71]

    C. V. d. Broeck and M. Esposito, The Three Faces of the Second Law: II. Fokker-Planck Formulation, Phys. Rev. E82 (2010) 011144 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.82.011144 [arXiv:1005.1686 [cond-mat]]

    2010 arXiv

  64. [72]

    J. S. Lee and H. Park, Additivity of multiple heat reservoirs in Langevin equation, Phys. Rev. E 97 (2018) 062135 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.97.062135 [arXiv:1712.00972 [cond-mat]]. – 33 –

    2018 arXiv

Pith tools

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