Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 56 references

From Fluctuation to Polarization: Imprints of $O(1-10)\, \mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$ Curvature Perturbations in CMB B-modes from Scalar-Induced Gravitational Waves

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper shows that scalar-induced gravitational waves, sourced inevitably by curvature fluctuations, imprint CMB B-modes that can rival inflationary predictions for $r = 10^{-3}$ and $10^{-4}$, giving CMB-S4 a new probe of the…

desk verdict A careful forecast of the induced-GW B-mode channel that is more incremental than its abstract admits, and whose headline sensitivity contours rest on an unquantified IR tail and an incomplete noise model. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.02044 v2 pith:U4FNQHVT submitted 2025-07-02 hep-ph astro-ph.COgr-qc

Aurora Ireland , Kuver Sinha , Tao Xu This is my paper
classification hep-phastro-ph.COgr-qc
keywords scalar-inducedgravitationalwavesCMBB-modepolarizationprimordialcurvatureperturbationssmall-scalepowerspectrumtensor-to-scalarratioCMB-Stage4second-ordercosmologicalperturbationtheoryspectraldistortions
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 argues that scalar-induced gravitational waves—tensor perturbations generated inevitably at second order in cosmological perturbation theory by curvature fluctuations—are not just a source of a stochastic gravitational-wave background but also imprint a distinctive B-mode polarization pattern on the CMB. The authors compute the angular B-mode spectrum from a narrowly peaked scalar power spectrum and show that, for peaks at $k \sim \mathcal{O}(1-10)\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$, the signal matches the signal-to-noise that inflation would produce with tensor-to-scalar ratio $r = 10^{-3}$ or $10^{-4}$ in a future CMB-polarization experiment with CMB-S4-like noise. Mapping those signals back to the scalar power spectrum, they find future B-mode experiments can probe amplitudes of $\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal R}(k)$ below current COBE/FIRAS spectral-distortion limits at those wavenumbers. The result matters because it opens a clean, statistically distinct window onto small-scale primordial fluctuations that are otherwise hidden behind Silk damping and modeling of small-scale structure.

What carries the argument

The argument runs through three objects. First, the induced tensor power spectrum $P_h(k)$ is built from a semi-analytic kernel $\tilde{I}_{\mathrm{RD}}(x,u,v)$ (the standard closed-form expression from the literature) integrated against the boxcar scalar power spectrum $\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal R}(k) = A\,B(k,k_p,\Delta)$; the boxcar is essential because it yields the causal $k^3$ low-frequency scaling, unlike the unphysical $k^2$ tail of a delta-function peak. Second, the B-mode angular spectrum is written as $C^{\mathrm{BB}}_\ell = 36\pi \int (dk/k)\, P_h(k)\, F_\ell(k)^2$, where $F_\ell(k)$ is a window function encoding visibility-function-weighted line-of-sight integrals that pick out how much each wavenumber contributes to a given multipole. Third, the initial spectra are set at horizon crossing ($x = 1$) and evolved with the Boltzmann solver CLASS using exact visibility and tensor transfer functions, with CMB-S4 forecast parameters used to convert spectra into signal-to-noise ratios.

What would settle it

Resolve whether plasma dissipation changes the low-frequency tail of the induced gravitational-wave spectrum, as flagged in Section 2.3.2: if the tail is damped, the CMB-S4 sensitivity contours of Fig. 6 move up and the claimed reach beyond spectral-distortion limits at $k \sim \mathcal{O}(1-10)\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$ weakens. Observationally, a null search by CMB-S4 for B-modes above lensing at $\ell \gtrsim 100$ with sensitivity to $r = 10^{-3}$ would rule out the scalar amplitudes the paper maps to that contour.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that induced tensor modes from enhanced scalar perturbations produce CMB B-mode polarization whose angular spectrum is computable and competitive with inflationary predictions. For a boxcar-shaped scalar power spectrum of width $\Delta = 10^{-2}$ peaking at $k_p$ in the range $1\text{--}10\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$, the induced tensor spectrum $P_h(k)$ has a causal $k^3$ infrared tail, and after propagation through recombination the resulting $D^{\mathrm{BB}}_\ell$ peaks at multipoles $\ell \gtrsim 100$ with no reionization bump. The authors match the signal-to-noise of this spectrum to that of an inflationary tensor background with $r = 10^{-3}$ and $10^{-4}$ using CMB-S4 forecast noise, and find the implied scalar amplitudes exceed the sensitivity of COBE/FIRAS spectral distortions for $k \sim \mathcal{O}(1-10)\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$ while remaining below existing Planck and Lyman-$\alpha$ bounds. The upshot is that future B-mode surveys can either detect or bound $\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal R}(k)$ on scales beyond the reach of current probes, with a signal that is qualitatively distinguishable from inflation by its spectral shape.

Load-bearing premise

The projected signal rests on the low-frequency tail of the induced gravitational-wave spectrum keeping its computed shape; the paper notes that plasma damping could modify that tail, and if it does, the forecast sensitivities and the reach beyond current spectral-distortion limits would shrink.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A detection or null of B-modes at $\ell \gtrsim 100$ by CMB-S4 directly constrains $\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal R}(k)$ at $k \sim \mathcal{O}(1-10)\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$, where current constraints are weak or model-dependent.
  • The induced B-mode spectrum peaks at higher multipoles and lacks the reionization bump, so it can in principle be distinguished from the scale-invariant inflationary signal if measured across a range of angular scales.
  • The scalar amplitudes needed to match inflation with $r = 10^{-3}$ sit just below current COBE/FIRAS spectral-distortion limits, placing them within reach of next-generation CMB experiments.
  • The same induced tensor modes produce a stochastic gravitational-wave background peaking at frequencies around $10\text{--}100$ femtohertz, far below any planned GW observatory, so the CMB route is the only near-term probe of those scales.
  • Unlike probes based on small-scale structure, the B-mode signal is robust and generic because tensor modes are statistically distinct from scalar perturbations, which at linear order source only E-mode polarization.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If plasma damping does steepen or suppress the infrared tail of the induced spectrum, the method still works but with reduced reach; a quantitative treatment would convert the forecasts of Fig. 6 into a robust exclusion curve rather than a sensitivity estimate.
  • Non-Gaussian curvature perturbations could raise the induced tensor power at fixed $\mathcal{P}_{\mathcal R}(k)$, so future B-mode searches might also constrain small-scale $f_{\mathrm{NL}}$ and $g_{\mathrm{NL}}$, an extension the paper lists as future work.
  • Because the signal is broadband in $\ell$, combining CMB-S4 with high-resolution delensing experiments and spectral-distortion measurements would allow multi-messenger discrimination between this source and a genuine inflationary tensor background.
  • Any future claim of primordial B-modes should first check whether a scalar peak at $k \sim 1\text{--}10\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$ with amplitude near the spectral-distortion bound could explain the signal before attributing it to inflation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes that scalar-induced gravitational waves from enhanced primordial curvature perturbations on scales k_p ~ O(1-10) Mpc^-1 source a CMB B-mode polarization signal. The authors derive the second-order induced tensor power spectrum for peaked scalar spectra (delta-function and boxcar), set initial tensor spectra at horizon crossing, feed them into CLASS via the external-pk module, and compute the B-mode angular spectrum D_BB_l. Comparing signal-to-noise with an inflationary r=10^-3 or 10^-4 signal under CMB-S4 noise assumptions, they construct Fig. 6 sensitivity contours in the P_R(k) plane and argue that these reach below FIRAS spectral-distortion constraints at k ~ 1-10 Mpc^-1.

Significance. If robust, this is a useful new window into primordial perturbations at scales where direct probes are largely absent, and it is presented as a forward model with no circular fitting to data. The paper's strengths include the explicit analytic formulas for the induced tensor spectrum, which the authors state they verified against the standard results of Refs. [25,26], and the use of CLASS with exact visibility and transfer functions. The main caveat is that the predicted B-mode signal is carried by the low-frequency tail of the induced tensor spectrum, whose normalization depends on an ad hoc boxcar width and on dissipative plasma effects that are explicitly deferred; in addition, the signal-to-noise forecasts omit lensing B-mode residuals and polarized foregrounds. These issues are specific and addressable, so the central idea remains credible pending those checks.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3.2 and §3.3, Eqs. (2.39)-(2.42), Fig. 6] The B-mode window F_l(k) in Eq. (3.19) peaks near k ~ 10^-3 to 0.1 Mpc^-1 for the multipoles used, far below the scalar peaks at 3-100 Mpc^-1; hence the projected sensitivity in Fig. 6 is controlled by the IR tail of P_h(k). That tail is not robustly determined: the delta-function limit gives an unphysical k^2 tail, the boxcar width Delta=0.01 is introduced ad hoc to restore the k^3 scaling, and Sec. 2.3.2 explicitly defers dissipative effects [28] that 'can lead to slight modifications in the scaling behavior of the low frequency tail.' The authors should quantify the dependence of the required amplitude A on Delta (or on a lognormal profile) and estimate the damping correction from [28]; until then, the Fig. 6 contours cannot be considered a robust forecast.
  2. [§3.1, Eqs. (3.16)-(3.17)] The decomposition h_lambda(eta,k) = h_lambda^ini(k) T(eta,k) treats the induced tensor mode as an initial amplitude at horizon crossing evolved by a source-free transfer function. After horizon crossing the scalar source in Eq. (2.1) is still active, so this is an approximation; the text says it was verified numerically for k < 1 Mpc^-1 and is conservative, but no comparison plot or quantitative error estimate is shown. Because CLASS uses this transfer-function input to produce all B-mode spectra, the central claim depends on the accuracy of this verification. Please show the actual comparison for the k range that dominates the B-mode signal and quantify the error.
  3. [§4.1, Eqs. (3.25)-(3.27)] The signal-to-noise definition includes only instrumental noise N_l. The statements that the induced signal is 'competitive' with r=10^-3 or 10^-4 and the contours in Fig. 6 therefore assume perfect delensing and no polarized foregrounds. Lensing B-modes are expected to exceed the r=10^-3 signal at many multipoles, and foregrounds are important at the assumed noise levels; the text only says that delensing is 'appropriate.' The forecasts should include a lensing residual term (e.g., a fraction of the lensing B-mode spectrum) and a foreground model, or state explicitly that the contours are idealized noise-only sensitivities.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Page header, §2.3.1] The running header contains a typo: 'F unction' should be 'Function'.
  2. [§3.3, Eq. (3.27)] The text gives Θ_FWHM = 1−30 arcmin, while Eq. (3.27) and Fig. 4 use Θ_FWHM = 1 arcmin; please clarify which beam model is used for the forecasts.
  3. [Footnote 11] The statement that the source needs azimuthal dependence is confusing because a single k-space delta function R_k ~ k_p δ(k - k_p) has no angular structure; the sentence should be reworded or removed.
  4. [References] Reference [10] is cited only as an arXiv e-print; if a peer-reviewed version has appeared, it should be cited for completeness.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the B-mode calculation is a forward model from the boxcar P_R(k) ansatz through standard SIGW kernels and CLASS; the 'competitive with r' claim is a disclosed S/N-matching calibration, and the only self-citation (Ref. [20]) is motivational, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation is a genuine forward model with no fitted parameters. Given the boxcar ansatz for the scalar power spectrum (Eq. 2.37), the induced tensor spectrum is computed from the standard second-order perturbation-theory kernel, Eq. (2.29), with the analytic kernel taken from Refs. [25, 26] ('Our I-tilde_RD coincides with the function I_RD of Ref. [25]'), and the B-mode angular spectrum is obtained by feeding that initial P_h(k) (set at x=1, Eq. 3.20) into the CLASS Boltzmann solver. No cosmological data are fitted anywhere, so nothing statistical is forced. The one claim that is true by construction is the headline 'signals can be competitive with inflationary predictions for r=10^-3 and r=10^-4': in Fig. 4 and Fig. 6 the scalar amplitude is chosen so that (S/N)^2 equals that of the inflationary signal (Eq. 3.25; Fig. 4 caption: 'the amplitude is chosen such that the signal-to-noise ratio matches the respective value from the inflationary signal'). This is a transparent benchmark convention, not a hidden fit, because footnote 1 states 'More precisely, they yield the same signal-to-noise ratios,' and the substantive content, the required P_R amplitude versus k_p compared against FIRAS, Planck, and Lyman-alpha bounds in Fig. 6, does not reduce to that calibration. The only self-citation is Ref. [20] (Greene, Ireland, Krnjaic, Tsai; Ireland is a co-author), invoked as motivation ('as first realized in Ref. [20]'); it is not load-bearing since the central calculation rests on independent standard literature and on CLASS. Manuscript-flagged limitations affect robustness but not circularity: Sec. 2.3.2 defers dissipative damping of the IR tail ('damping effects [28] can lead to slight modifications in the scaling behavior of the low frequency tail'), Sec. 3.1 approximates post-horizon mode evolution with a sourceless transfer function, and Sec. 3.2 fixes the initial time at horizon crossing; the boxcar width Delta=0.01 is arbitrary too. Each could shift the Fig. 6 contours, but none makes an output equal to an input by construction. Verdict: no significant circularity; score 1 for the minor, non-load-bearing self-citation.

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

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or conserved quantities. Its central claims rest on standard cosmological perturbation theory, on the chosen form of the scalar power spectrum (boxcar with width Delta = 0.01 and amplitude A), on the horizon-crossing initial condition, and on an idealized CMB-S4 noise model. These assumptions are mostly standard, but the amplitude and width are model inputs and the noise model is optimistic.

free parameters (3)
  • Scalar peak amplitude A = Not stated numerically; chosen so that S/N matches inflationary r = 10^-3 or 10^-4 in Figs. 4 and 6
    This amplitude controls the entire predicted B-mode signal and sensitivity map, but the paper reports only the resulting curves, not the values of A for the benchmarks.
  • Boxcar width Delta = 0.01
    Fixed in Sec. 3.3 and Fig. 4 for all benchmarks. The IR tail of the induced tensor spectrum, which drives the B-mode signal, depends on the width and on the treatment of dissipative effects, and no variation or uncertainty is shown.
  • CMB-S4 noise parameters = Delta_p = 1.5 uK arcmin, Theta_FWHM = 1 arcmin, ell_knee = 60, gamma = -3, ell_min = 30, ell_max = 3000; fsky not…
    Equations (3.25)-(3.27) define the forecast S/N, but the noise model is purely instrumental and omits lensing residuals and foregrounds, making the projections optimistic.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Standard FLRW background and second-order cosmological perturbation theory with Gaussian curvature perturbations
    Used throughout Sec. 2 to derive the induced tensor power spectrum; the connected trispectrum is set to zero in Eq. (2.12).
  • domain assumption Radiation domination during gravitational wave production with negligible anisotropic stress, Phi = Psi
    Invoked in Secs. 2.1 and 2.2 to obtain the Green's function and transfer function; free-streaming neutrinos produce some anisotropic stress that is not modeled in the source.
  • ad hoc to paper The induced tensor mode can be treated as an initial amplitude at horizon crossing times a source-free transfer function
    Stated in Sec. 3.1 around Eqs. (3.16)-(3.17) and acknowledged as an approximation. The authors verify numerically for simple cases but this decomposition is load-bearing for the B-mode calculation.
  • ad hoc to paper Dissipative effects on the low-frequency tail of the induced tensor spectrum are negligible
    Sec. 2.3.2 notes that damping effects 'can lead to slight modifications in the scaling behavior of the low frequency tail' but the calculation does not include them; this tail dominates the CMB B-mode response.
  • domain assumption CMB-S4 noise can be approximated by the white-noise-plus-knee model of Eqs. (3.26)-(3.27) with delensing of lensing B-modes not explicitly modeled
    The S/N forecasts in Sec. 3.3 and Fig. 6 rely on this idealized noise model, with no lensing residual or foreground term.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of From Fluctuation to Polarization: Imprints of $O(1-10)\, \mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$ Curvature Perturbations in CMB B-modes from Scalar-Induced Gravitational Waves." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U4FNQHVT

@misc{pith2026250702044,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: From Fluctuation to Polarization: Imprints of $O(1-10)\, \mathrmMpc^-1$ Curvature Perturbations in CMB B-modes from Scalar-Induced Gravitational Waves},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U4FNQHVT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.02044}
}
abstract

Probing primordial curvature perturbations on small scales, beyond those accessible using cosmic microwave background (CMB) primary anisotropies and Lyman-$\alpha$ forest data, remains a major open challenge. Current constraints on the scalar power spectrum at these scales are either weak or rely heavily on model-dependent assumptions about small-scale structure. In this work, we propose a novel method to probe the small-scale primordial power spectrum using scalar-induced tensor perturbations, which are inevitably sourced by curvature perturbations at second order in cosmological perturbation theory. While induced tensor modes have traditionally been studied in the context of the stochastic gravitational wave background, we highlight a complementary observable: the distinctive pattern of B-mode polarization they imprint on the CMB. We compute the angular spectrum of these B-modes arising from enhanced scalar perturbations and show that the resulting signal can be competitive with inflationary predictions for values of the tensor-to-scalar ratio targeted in upcoming CMB experiments, most notably CMB-Stage 4. We map the region of the scalar power spectrum to which these future B-mode experiments will be sensitive and compare with existing constraints, finding it to exceed current sensitivities at $k \sim O(1-10)\, \mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$. In addition to providing a new CMB-based probe of the small-scale power spectrum, this work also motivates dedicated B-mode searches at higher multipoles ($\ell \gtrsim 100$).

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [48]

    CMB Constraints on the Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Background at Mpc scales

    T. Namikawa, S. Saga, D. Yamauchi and A. Taruya,CMB Constraints on the Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Background at Mpc scales, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) 021303 [1904.02115]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

  2. [28]

    Domènech and J

    G. Domènech and J. Chluba,Regularizing the induced GW spectrum with dissipative effects, 2503.13670

    arXiv

  3. [1]

    Collaboration,Planck 2018 results

    P. Collaboration,Planck 2018 results. vi. cosmological parameters, Astronomy & Astrophysics641 (2020) A6 [1807.06209]

    arXiv 2020

  4. [2]

    Palanque-Delabrouille,Constraint on neutrino masses from sdss-iii/boss lyα forest and other cosmological probes, JCAP 02 (2015) 045 [1410.7244]

    N.e.a. Palanque-Delabrouille,Constraint on neutrino masses from sdss-iii/boss lyα forest and other cosmological probes, JCAP 02 (2015) 045 [1410.7244]

    arXiv 2015

  5. [3]

    Chluba, R

    J. Chluba, R. Khatri and R.A. Sunyaev,CMB at 2x2 order: The dissipation of primordial acoustic waves and the observable part of the associated energy release, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 425 (2012) 1129 [1202.0057]

    arXiv 2012

  6. [4]

    Chluba, A.L

    J. Chluba, A.L. Erickcek and I. Ben-Dayan,Probing the inflaton: Small-scale power spectrum constraints from measurements of the CMB energy spectrum, Astrophys. J. 758 (2012) 76 [1203.2681]

    arXiv 2012

  7. [5]

    Mather, E.S

    J.C. Mather, E.S. Cheng, D.A. Cottingham, R.E. Eplee, Jr., D.J. Fixsen, T. Hewagama et al., Measurement of the Cosmic Microwave Background Spectrum by the COBE FIRAS Instrument, apj 420 (1994) 439

    work page 1994

  8. [6]

    Fixsen, E.S

    D.J. Fixsen, E.S. Cheng, J.M. Gales, J.C. Mather, R.A. Shafer and E.L. Wright,The Cosmic Microwave Background spectrum from the full COBE FIRAS data set, Astrophys. J. 473 (1996) 576 [astro-ph/9605054]

    arXiv 1996

Show all 56 references
  1. [7]

    Kogut,The primordial inflation explorer (pixie): a nulling polarimeter for cosmic microwave background observations, JCAP 07 (2011) 025 [1105.2044]

    A.e.a. Kogut,The primordial inflation explorer (pixie): a nulling polarimeter for cosmic microwave background observations, JCAP 07 (2011) 025 [1105.2044]

    2011 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Kogut et al.,The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): mission design and science goals, JCAP 04 (2025) 020 [2405.20403]

    A. Kogut et al.,The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): mission design and science goals, JCAP 04 (2025) 020 [2405.20403]

    2025 arXiv

  3. [9]

    B. Carr, F. Kuhnel and M. Sandstad,Primordial black holes as dark matter, Phys. Rev. D94 (2016) 083504 [1607.06077]

    2016 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Graham and H

    P.W. Graham and H. Ramani,Probing the primordial power spectrum with the stellar heating of ultra-faint dwarfs, arXiv e-prints (2024) [ 2404.01378]

    2024 arXiv

  5. [11]

    W. Qin, S. Kumar, P. Natarajan and N. Weiner,Not-quite-primordial black holes, 2506.13858

    arXiv

  6. [12]

    Bringmann, D

    T. Bringmann, D. Croon and S. Sevillano Muñoz,Updated constraints on the primordial power spectrum at sub-Mpc scales, 2506.20704

    arXiv

  7. [13]

    Ananda,Cosmological gravitational wave background from primordial density perturbations, Phys

    K.N.e.a. Ananda,Cosmological gravitational wave background from primordial density perturbations, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 123518 [astro-ph/0612013]

    2007 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Baumann,Gravitational wave spectrum induced by primordial scalar perturbations, Phys

    D.e.a. Baumann,Gravitational wave spectrum induced by primordial scalar perturbations, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 084019 [hep-th/0703290]

    2007 arXiv

  9. [15]

    NANOGra vcollaboration, The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-wave Background, Astrophys. J. Lett.951 (2023) L8 [2306.16213]

    2023 arXiv

  10. [16]

    Search for gravitational wave signals, Astron

    EPTA, InPTA: collaboration, The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array - III. Search for gravitational wave signals, Astron. Astrophys.678 (2023) A50 [2306.16214]

    2023 arXiv

  11. [17]

    Reardon et al.,Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array, Astrophys

    D.J. Reardon et al.,Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array, Astrophys. J. Lett.951 (2023) L6 [2306.16215]. – 22 –

    2023 arXiv

  12. [18]

    Xu et al.,Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I, Res

    H. Xu et al.,Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I, Res. Astron. Astrophys.23 (2023) 075024 [2306.16216]

    2023 arXiv

  13. [19]

    LISA collaboration, Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, 1702.00786

    arXiv

  14. [20]

    Greene, A

    K. Greene, A. Ireland, G. Krnjaic and Y. Tsai,Observable CMB B-modes from Cosmological Phase Transitions, 2410.23348

    arXiv

  15. [21]

    Abazajian, Cmb-s4 science book, first edition, arXiv e-prints (2016) [ 1610.02743]

    K.N.e.a. Abazajian, Cmb-s4 science book, first edition, arXiv e-prints (2016) [ 1610.02743]

    2016 arXiv

  16. [22]

    CMB-S4 collaboration, CMB-S4: Forecasting Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves, Astrophys. J. 926 (2022) 54 [2008.12619]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [23]

    Lesgourgues,The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) I: Overview, 1104.2932

    J. Lesgourgues,The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) I: Overview, 1104.2932

    arXiv

  18. [24]

    D. Blas, J. Lesgourgues and T. Tram,The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) II: Approximation schemes, JCAP 07 (2011) 034 [1104.2933]

    2011 arXiv

  19. [25]

    Kohri and T

    K. Kohri and T. Terada,Semianalytic calculation of gravitational wave spectrum nonlinearly induced from primordial curvature perturbations, Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) 123532 [1804.08577]

    2018 arXiv

  20. [26]

    Espinosa, D

    J.R. Espinosa, D. Racco and A. Riotto,A Cosmological Signature of the SM Higgs Instability: Gravitational Waves, JCAP 09 (2018) 012 [1804.07732]

    2018 arXiv

  21. [27]

    R.-G. Cai, S. Pi and M. Sasaki,Universal infrared scaling of gravitational wave background spectra, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) 083528 [1909.13728]

    2020 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Domènech,Scalar Induced Gravitational Waves Review, Universe 7 (2021) 398 [2109.01398]

    G. Domènech,Scalar Induced Gravitational Waves Review, Universe 7 (2021) 398 [2109.01398]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Gorbunov and V.A

    D.S. Gorbunov and V.A. Rubakov,Introduction to the theory of the early universe: Cosmological perturbations and inflationary theory(2011), 10.1142/7873

    2011 doi

  24. [31]

    SPTpol collaboration, Detection of B-mode Polarization in the Cosmic Microwave Background with Data from the South Pole Telescope, Phys. Rev. Lett.111 (2013) 141301 [1307.5830]

    2013 arXiv

  25. [32]

    SPT collaboration, Measurements of B-mode Polarization of the Cosmic Microwave Background from 500 Square Degrees of SPTpol Data, Phys. Rev. D101 (2020) 122003 [1910.05748]

    2020 arXiv

  26. [33]

    ACTPol collaboration, The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: Two-Season ACTPol Spectra and Parameters, JCAP 06 (2017) 031 [1610.02360]

    2017 arXiv

  27. [34]

    POLARBEAR collaboration, A Measurement of the Cosmic Microwave Background B-Mode Polarization Power Spectrum at Sub-Degree Scales with POLARBEAR, Astrophys. J. 794 (2014) 171 [1403.2369]

    2014 arXiv

  28. [35]

    BICEP, Keck collaboration, Improved Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021) 151301 [2110.00483]

    2021

  29. [36]

    Hui et al.,BICEP Array: a multi-frequency degree-scale CMB polarimeter, Proc

    H. Hui et al.,BICEP Array: a multi-frequency degree-scale CMB polarimeter, Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng.10708 (2018) 1070807 [1808.00568]

    2018 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Low Temp

    POLARBEAR collaboration, The POLARBEAR-2 and the Simons Array Experiment, J. Low Temp. Phys. 184 (2016) 805 [1512.07299]

    2016 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Simons Obser v atorycollaboration, The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts, JCAP 02 (2019) 056 [1808.07445]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Simons Obser v atorycollaboration, The Simons Observatory: Science Goals and Forecasts for the Enhanced Large Aperture Telescope, 2503.00636

    arXiv

  33. [40]

    LiteBIRD collaboration, Probing Cosmic Inflation with the LiteBIRD Cosmic Microwave Background Polarization Survey, PTEP 2023 (2023) 042F01 [2202.02773]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Tristram et al.,Improved limits on the tensor-to-scalar ratio using BICEP and Planck data, Phys

    M. Tristram et al.,Improved limits on the tensor-to-scalar ratio using BICEP and Planck data, Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) 083524 [2112.07961]. – 23 –

    2022 arXiv

  35. [42]

    de Belsunce, S

    R. de Belsunce, S. Gratton and G. Efstathiou,B-mode constraints from Planck low-multipole polarization data, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.518 (2022) 3675 [2207.04903]

    2022 arXiv

  36. [43]

    NASA PICO collaboration, PICO: Probe of Inflation and Cosmic Origins, 1902.10541

    1902 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Planck collaboration, Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation, Astron. Astrophys.641 (2020) A10 [1807.06211]

    2020 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Bird, H.V

    S. Bird, H.V. Peiris, M. Viel and L. Verde,Minimally parametric power spectrum reconstruction from the Lymanα forest, mnras 413 (2011) 1717 [1010.1519]

    2011 arXiv

  39. [46]

    CMB-HD collaboration, Snowmass2021 CMB-HD White Paper, 2203.05728

    arXiv

  40. [47]

    B. Cyr, T. Kite, J. Chluba, J.C. Hill, D. Jeong, S.K. Acharya et al.,Disentangling the primordial nature of stochastic gravitational wave backgrounds with CMB spectral distortions, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.528 (2024) 883 [2309.02366]

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Ng,Redshift-space fluctuations in stochastic gravitational wave background, Phys

    K.-W. Ng,Redshift-space fluctuations in stochastic gravitational wave background, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 043505 [2106.12843]

    2022 arXiv

  42. [50]

    KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, Virgo collaboration, Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and KAGRA, Living Rev. Rel. 19 (2016) 1 [1304.0670]

    2016 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Moore, D.P

    C.J. Moore, D.P. Mihaylov, A. Lasenby and G. Gilmore,Astrometric Search Method for Individually Resolvable Gravitational Wave Sources with Gaia, Phys. Rev. Lett.119 (2017) 261102 [1707.06239]

    2017 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Garcia-Bellido, H

    J. Garcia-Bellido, H. Murayama and G. White,Exploring the early Universe with Gaia and Theia, JCAP 12 (2021) 023 [2104.04778]

    2021 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Astrophys

    Gaia collaboration, Gaia Data Release 2: Summary of the contents and survey properties, Astron. Astrophys. 616 (2018) A1 [1804.09365]

    2018 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Theia collaboration, Theia: Faint objects in motion or the new astrometry frontier, 1707.01348

    arXiv

  47. [55]

    R.-g. Cai, S. Pi and M. Sasaki,Gravitational Waves Induced by non-Gaussian Scalar Perturbations, Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 201101 [1810.11000]

    2019 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Perna, C

    G. Perna, C. Testini, A. Ricciardone and S. Matarrese,Fully non-Gaussian Scalar-Induced Gravitational Waves, JCAP 05 (2024) 086 [2403.06962]. – 24 –

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.