Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 5 cited by

Waterfall phase in supersymmetric hybrid inflation

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 This paper argues that in R-symmetric supersymmetric hybrid inflation with a non-minimal Kähler potential and a significant soft linear term, inflation continues for roughly 8 to 27 e-foldings after the waterfall begins, and the resulting…

desk verdict Solid waterfall/SIGW machinery applied to R-symmetric SUSY hybrid inflation, but the SU(5) monopole and PTA claims rest on an unargued alignment assumption and a scanned gravitino mass. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.10460 v1 pith:OTNDORIX submitted 2025-07-14 hep-ph astro-ph.CO

Ahmad Moursy , Qaisar Shafi This is my paper
classification hep-phastro-ph.CO
keywords supersymmetrichybridinflationwaterfallphaseR-symmetrynon-minimalKählerpotentialscalar-inducedgravitationalwavesGUTmonopolesspectralindexpulsartimingarrays
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

The paper asks whether the waterfall field—the scalar that ends hybrid inflation by breaking the GUT gauge group—can itself participate in inflation instead of ending it abruptly. Working in an R-symmetric supersymmetric hybrid inflation model with a non-minimal Kähler potential and a significant soft supersymmetry-breaking linear term, the authors show that inflation can continue for about $\Delta N_c \approx 8$–$27$ e-foldings after the waterfall begins. During this phase quantum fluctuations of the waterfall field are converted into curvature perturbations on small scales, and those scalar perturbations source a stochastic gravitational wave background at second order. Tuning the gravitino mass to about $m_{3/2}\approx 461$ GeV makes the background compatible with recent pulsar timing array results, and in an SU(5) version the same phase dilutes primordial GUT monopoles: one benchmark leaves a monopole yield just below the current experimental upper bound, while the other benchmarks dilute it far more. If the scenario is right, one inflationary model simultaneously matches CMB-scale constraints, explains a nanohertz gravitational wave signal, and turns a cosmological monopole problem into a potentially observable monopole abundance.

What carries the argument

The central object is the two-phase waterfall dynamics described by the slow-roll equations in terms of $\xi = (\sigma-\sigma_c)/\sigma_c$ and $\chi = \ln(\psi/\psi_0)$. In phase I the linear soft term dominates the motion and lasts $N_1$ e-foldings; phase II is short, and the total $\Delta N_c = N_1 + N_2$ controls both the peak height of the scalar power spectrum and the dilution factor $e^{-3\Delta N_c}$ in the monopole yield. The parameter $\mu_1$, which encodes the gravitino mass and the SUSY-breaking scale, sets the tilt of the potential and the duration of the waterfall. Around the critical point the paper uses a $\delta N$ formula to convert the stochastic spread $\psi_0$ of the waterfall field into a curvature power spectrum, and for the SU(5) case it treats $N=12$ real waterfall fields via a radial-mode stochastic equation with an effective centrifugal force. These ingredients together couple the gravitational wave prediction, the monopole dilution, and the inflationary observables.

What would settle it

One decisive check is to run the full 12-field stochastic dynamics without fixing the alignment direction: if the radial mode typically points away from $\mathrm{Re}(\phi_{24})$, the broken group is not the Standard Model and the predicted monopole yield and gravitational wave peak would differ from the quoted benchmarks. A second check is a high-frequency gravitational wave search at the interferometer scales where the non-PTA benchmarks predict peaks; a null result there would exclude those benchmarks, while a detection in the nanohertz band that contradicts the predicted spectral shape would rule out the scalar-induced interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes a new corner of the parameter space of R-symmetric supersymmetric hybrid inflation: with inflation happening close to the critical point, radiative corrections negligible, and a significant linear soft SUSY-breaking term, the single-field effective potential yields a scalar spectral index $n_s\approx 0.968$–$0.972$ at the pivot scale. The waterfall field, whose mass becomes tachyonic at $\sigma = \sigma_c$, does not roll to the minimum immediately; the linear term and the tilt provided by the non-minimal Kähler coupling keep inflation going for $\Delta N_c \approx 8.4$, $23.5$, or $26.7$ e-foldings in the three benchmarks. During this phase the curvature power spectrum $P_\zeta(k)$ develops a peak on scales much smaller than those probed by the CMB, and the scalar-induced gravitational wave spectrum from that peak can accommodate the pulsar timing array signal for $m_{3/2}\approx 461$ GeV. In the SU(5) example with $v = 2.42\times 10^{16}$ GeV, the monopole yield after dilution is $Y_M\approx 0.82\times 10^{-28}$ for the first benchmark, just below the current experimental bound, and far smaller for the other two, so the waterfall phase converts the standard GUT monopole problem into a potentially observable monopole flux.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that during the multifield stochastic dynamics the radial waterfall field aligns with the exact Standard-Model-preserving direction $\psi = \mathrm{Re}(\phi_{24})$, stated in Section 5.1 without derivation; if all directions in the field space are equally likely, this particular direction has measure zero, and a different alignment would change the unbroken gauge group, the monopole abundance, and possibly the curvature perturbation spectrum.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The predicted stochastic gravitational wave background from the waterfall phase is testable: for the pulsar-timing-compatible benchmark it falls in the nanohertz band, and for other benchmark points it falls within the sensitivity regions of planned space- and ground-based interferometers.
  • GUT monopoles in SU(5) need not be fatal: with $\Delta N_c \approx 8$–$27$ e-foldings after the waterfall starts, the monopole yield is diluted from an initially problematic value to a range that ends just below the current experimental flux bound in the first benchmark and far below it in the others.
  • The model predicts a scalar spectral index $n_s\approx 0.968$–$0.978$, consistent with recent CMB data, together with a negligibly small tensor-to-scalar ratio $r\sim 10^{-16}$–$10^{-17}$.
  • The waterfall-phase power spectrum has a localized peak at small scales, so the same enhanced perturbations could in principle seed primordial black holes, although the paper notes that their abundance is highly suppressed in the SU(5) realization.
  • The duration $\Delta N_c$ and the peak amplitude of the power spectrum are sensitive to the gravitino mass $m_{3/2}$, making the gravitational wave signal a cosmological probe of the SUSY-breaking scale.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper's benchmarks, the alignment assumption could be tested by a dedicated simulation of the full $O(12)$ dynamics: if the radial field typically settles along a direction that does not preserve the Standard Model, the monopole yield and the gravitational wave peak would shift, possibly tightening or relaxing the experimental bound.
  • The same waterfall mechanism suggests a general correlation in any GUT whose waterfall field breaks the group: the e-folding count that sets the gravitational wave peak frequency also sets the topological-defect dilution, so combined pulsar-timing and monopole searches could discriminate between GUT choices.
  • If the pulsar timing array signal is confirmed as a scalar-induced gravitational wave background from this waterfall phase, the inferred gravitino mass near 461 GeV would become a cosmological measurement of the SUSY-breaking scale in this model class.
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 paper studies supersymmetric hybrid inflation with an R-symmetric superpotential, a non-minimal Kähler potential, and a soft SUSY-breaking linear term, focusing on the dynamics after the waterfall transition. The authors claim that inflation continues for roughly 8 to 27 e-folds after the waterfall begins, producing enhanced curvature perturbations. These perturbations source a scalar-induced stochastic gravitational wave background, and for a gravitino mass m3/2 ≈ 461 GeV the spectrum is shown to be compatible with NANOGrav/EPTA data. In an SU(5) embedding, the same waterfall phase dilutes superheavy GUT monopoles to yields as low as YM ≈ 10^-53, with one benchmark (BP1) lying just below the MACRO bound. The central results include analytic slow-roll expressions for the spectral index, tensor-to-scalar ratio, scalar amplitude, and e-fold counts, supplemented by numerical spectra and explicit benchmark points.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper provides a compact framework that connects CMB-scale observables (ns ≈ 0.97–0.978, in agreement with ACT DR6) to smaller-scale curvature perturbations, pulsar-timing-array gravitational wave signals, and GUT monopole abundances, all within a single supersymmetric hybrid inflation model. The analytic expressions and benchmark table are useful, and the use of recent NANOGrav/EPTA and ACT data gives the phenomenological targets currency. However, the significance is tempered by the fact that the PTA-compatible spectrum is obtained by scanning a free parameter (m3/2), and the SU(5) monopole conclusions rest on an unverified field-alignment assumption. The paper is therefore best read as a proof of principle until these points are addressed.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3, Eq. (3.2)] The expression for µ1 has inconsistent mass dimensions: the second term, σc²(MS²/Λ⁴ − κS/M_Pl²), is dimensionless while the first and third terms have dimension 1/mass. The derivative of the σ² term in Eq. (2.9) would give a contribution proportional to σc, not σc². As printed, Eq. (3.2) cannot reproduce Eqs. (3.7)–(3.10) or the benchmark values in Table 1. This is load-bearing because the scalar amplitude relation (3.7) and the waterfall e-fold estimates depend on µ1. The typo should be corrected and the numerical benchmarks rechecked.
  2. [Sec. 5.1, Eqs. (5.3)–(5.5)] The statement in Sec. 5.1 that during the classical dynamics ψr aligns along the SM-preserving direction ψ = Re(φ24) is an unverified assumption. The scalar potential (5.3) and superpotential (5.1) depend only on the O(12)-invariant radial combination, leaving 11 angular directions exactly flat, and the stochastic noise is isotropic. A generic stochastic trajectory therefore gives expectation values to color-octet and weak-triplet components, which would break SU(3)c or SU(2)L rather than leave the SM gauge group. Since the monopole yield in Eq. (5.9), the identification of v = 2.42×10^16 GeV as the SU(5) GUT scale, and the computed Pζ and gravitational wave spectra all presuppose SU(5) → SU(3)c×SU(2)L×U(1)Y breaking, the central numerical conclusions do not follow from the model as written. A selection mechanism (for example, higher-order terms in W or K) or a derivation of the alignment should be provided.
  3. [Sec. 5.3 and Fig. 5] The PTA-compatible spectrum is obtained by tuning the free parameter m3/2 to 461 GeV. Because m3/2 is not constrained independently in this paper, the agreement with NANOGrav/EPTA is an a posteriori fit rather than a falsifiable prediction. This is not by itself fatal, but it should be stated explicitly. The authors could strengthen the claim by identifying independent constraints on m3/2 (for example, gravitino cosmology or low-energy supersymmetry) or by presenting the PTA match strictly as an illustrative benchmark.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4] There is a typo in the sentence 'the the dynamics during the WF is sensitive to µ1'; 'the the' should be 'the'.
  2. [Sec. 5.3, Fig. 4 caption] The caption reads 'Figure4 :' without a space; it should read 'Figure 4:'.
  3. [References [39] and [110]] The collaboration name is typeset as 'NANOGra vcollaboration'; this should be 'NANOGrav collaboration'.
  4. [Sec. 4, Eq. (4.4)] The expression for the initial variance ψ0² is introduced without derivation; since it plays an important role in the peak amplitude (4.19), a brief derivation or a clearer pointer to the cited references would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the PTA match is a parameter-space scan over the free gravitino mass, and the SU(5) alignment is an explicit assumption rather than a derived prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is not circular by construction. The enhanced curvature power spectrum (Eqs. 4.18-4.19) and the waterfall e-foldings (Eqs. 4.10-4.16) are derived from the model parameters through μ1, which is an analytic function of m3/2, κ, κS, γS, and the scale v (Eq. 3.2); no PTA or monopole datum enters these expressions. The NANOGrav/EPTA compatibility shown in Fig. 5 is obtained by choosing m3/2 = 461 GeV (BP3); the paper does not claim to predict m3/2 from first principles, so this is a standard parameter scan rather than a fitted input renamed as a prediction. Similarly, the monopole yields in Table 1 and Fig. 3 are presented as functions of the free gravitino mass, not as parameter-free predictions. The SU(5) monopole and gravitational-wave statements do rely on the explicit assumption in Sec. 5.1 that 'during the classical dynamics ψr aligns in the direction ψ that breaks SU(5) to the SM gauge group'; because the potential in Eq. (5.3) is O(12)-symmetric, this alignment is not derived from the model. That is a genuine dynamical gap and a correctness risk for the SU(5) application, but it is an assumption stated in the paper, not a reduction of the output to the input by definition. The monopole yield formula (5.9) is cited to the authors' Ref. [80], but the exponential dilution dependence is standard and the surrounding calculation is not closed by self-citation alone; independent references support the perturbation formalism ([21,62,63]) and the stochastic equations ([29,30,60,61]). No load-bearing step in the derivation is equivalent to its own input, so the paper is not significantly circular; the minor self-citations are not load-bearing.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model's predictions are controlled by several free parameters, most notably m3/2, κS, and κ, which are fitted to observations or chosen by hand. The field content (inflaton, waterfall fields, gravitino, GUT monopoles) is standard; no new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced. The central quantitative outputs therefore depend on scanning free parameters rather than on a parameter-free derivation.

free parameters (8)
  • κ (coupling) = 2.35 × 10^-7 (BP1), 3.51 × 10^-8 (BP2), 2.71 × 10^-8 (BP3)
    Set by matching the scalar amplitude As ≈ 2.1 × 10^-9 via Eq. (3.7)/(3.10).
  • v (GUT scale) = 2.42 × 10^16 GeV
    Chosen to be consistent with gauge coupling unification in SU(5); treated as fixed input.
  • m3/2 (gravitino mass) = 4563 GeV (BP1), 597 GeV (BP2), 461 GeV (BP3)
    Free SUSY-breaking parameter; BP3 is selected so the SIGW peak matches NANOGrav/EPTA, and BP1 is selected so the monopole yield approaches the MACRO bound.
  • κS (non-minimal Kähler coefficient) = 0.016 (BP1), 0.014 (BP2), 0.0141 (BP3)
    Chosen to set the scalar spectral index in the range ns ≈ 0.968 to 0.972 via ns ≈ 1 - 2κS.
  • γS = 0.944
    Chosen by hand with |γS| ≲ 1; enters the cubic and quartic terms in the potential expansion.
  • MS (soft mass parameter) = ≈ 1 TeV
    Assumed to be of order 1 TeV; the authors take |MS^2/(κ^2 M^2)| ≪ 1.
  • Tr (reheating temperature) = 10^9 GeV
    Fixed at the upper bound allowed by gravitino overproduction constraints.
  • a (soft linear coefficient phase) = +1
    Set by hand to fix the sign and phase of the soft linear term in Eq. (2.8).
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Standard N=1 supergravity F-term potential with canonical and non-minimal Kähler terms correctly describes inflation
    Used throughout Section 2 to derive Veff and the slow-roll equations; background framework, not independently proved here.
  • domain assumption The slow-roll Langevin and δN stochastic formalism for the waterfall field applies with Gaussian white noise
    Section 4 Eq. (4.3) and Section 5.1 Eq. (5.4); this is the established multifield stochastic method on which the predictions rely.
  • domain assumption After SU(5) breaking, 24 imaginary components are heavy and 12 real components are eaten by gauge bosons, leaving 12 light real waterfall fields
    Section 5.1 gives the degree-of-freedom count; it determines the centrifugal-force enhancement factor in Eq. (5.5).
  • ad hoc to paper The radial waterfall field ψr aligns with the SM-preserving direction ψ = Re(φ24) during the stochastic dynamics
    Stated explicitly in Section 5.1; not derived from the O(N) dynamics and has measure-zero probability if all directions are equally likely.
  • domain assumption Radiative corrections can be neglected because κ is small
    Section 3; κ ≈ 10^-8 to 10^-7 makes the κ^2 N/(8π^2) F(x) term subdominant, but this is a parameter-regime assumption.
  • standard math Standard scalar-induced GW formula and monopole yield formula from the literature are valid
    Section 5.2 and 5.3 use Eqs. (5.9) and (5.12) from prior work; no re-derivation is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Waterfall phase in supersymmetric hybrid inflation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OTNDORIX

@misc{pith2026250710460,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Waterfall phase in supersymmetric hybrid inflation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OTNDORIX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.10460}
}
abstract

We explore a class of realistic supersymmetric hybrid inflation models with a predicted scalar spectral index $n_s \approx 0.97-0.978$, which is in good agreement with the recent Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) measurement. The waterfall field responsible for the gauge symmetry breaking in this scenario experiences some $e$-foldings during the inflationary epoch. The scalar perturbations associated with the waterfall field during this phase induce a stochastic gravitational wave spectrum that will be tested in the ongoing Pulsar Timing Array (PTA) measurements and in future experiments. In an $SU(5)$ setting an observable number density of the superheavy GUT monopole linked to the waterfall field can be realized.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. GUT-Scale Smooth Hybrid Inflation with a Stabilized Modulus in Light of ACT and SPT Data

    hep-ph 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A smooth hybrid inflation model, augmented with a stabilized modulus, reproduces the spectral index measured by ACT and SPT while keeping Higgs v.e.v.s at the GUT scale.

  2. Induced-Gravity Palatini-Like Higgs Inflation in Supergravity Confronts ACT DR6

    hep-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A Palatini-supergravity Higgs-inflation model with induced gravity predicts a scalar spectral index ns≈0.972-0.974, consistent with ACT DR6, and favors split supersymmetry with gravitino mass 40-60 PeV.

  3. F-Term Hybrid Inflation with T-Model K\"ahler Geometry and Beyond

    hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    F-term hybrid inflation with SU(1,1)/U(1) or SU(2)/U(1) Kähler geometry in GUTs can be realized without inflationary extrema for broad parameters, matching ACT/SPT data via curvature and tadpole adjustments while pred...

  4. Magnetic monopoles and high frequency gravitational waves from quasi-stable strings

    hep-ph 2026-03 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    SO(10) breaking through flipped SU(5) or Pati-Salam subgroups can produce GUT monopoles from merging monopole-antimonopole pairs, while the intervening quasi-stable strings emit gravitational waves from Hz to kHz.

  5. Induced-Gravity Palatini-Like Higgs Inflation in Supergravity Confronts ACT DR6

    hep-ph 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    A Palatini-inspired induced-gravity inflation model in supergravity fits ACT DR6 data while embedding into a B-L extended MSSM with split SUSY and leptogenesis.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

111 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [49]

    $\mu$-Hybrid Inflation with Low Reheat Temperature and Observable Gravity Waves

    M.U. Rehman, Q. Shafi and F.K. Vardag,µ-Hybrid Inflation with Low Reheat Temperature and Observable Gravity Waves, Phys. Rev. D96 (2017) 063527 [1705.03693]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  2. [1]

    Dvali, Q

    G.R. Dvali, Q. Shafi and R.K. Schaefer,Large scale structure and supersymmetric inflation without fine tuning, Phys. Rev. Lett.73 (1994) 1886 [hep-ph/9406319]

    arXiv 1994

  3. [2]

    Copeland, A.R

    E.J. Copeland, A.R. Liddle, D.H. Lyth, E.D. Stewart and D. Wands,False vacuum inflation with Einstein gravity, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 6410 [astro-ph/9401011]

    arXiv 1994

  4. [3]

    Linde and A

    A.D. Linde and A. Riotto,Hybrid inflation in supergravity, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) R1841 [hep-ph/9703209]

    arXiv 1997

  5. [4]

    ACT collaboration, The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Constraints on Extended Cosmological Models, 2503.14454

    arXiv

  6. [5]

    Rehman, Q

    M.U. Rehman, Q. Shafi and J.R. Wickman,Supersymmetric Hybrid Inflation Redux, Phys. Lett. B683 (2010) 191 [0908.3896]

    arXiv 2010

  7. [6]

    Senoguz and Q

    V.N. Senoguz and Q. Shafi,Reheat temperature in supersymmetric hybrid inflation models, Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 043514 [hep-ph/0412102]. – 19 –

    arXiv 2005

  8. [7]

    Dvali, G

    G.R. Dvali, G. Lazarides and Q. Shafi,Mu problem and hybrid inflation in supersymmetric SU(2)-L x SU(2)-R x U(1)-(B-L), Phys. Lett. B424 (1998) 259 [hep-ph/9710314]

    arXiv 1998

Show all 111 references
  1. [8]

    Buchmüller, V

    W. Buchmüller, V. Domcke, K. Kamada and K. Schmitz,Hybrid Inflation in the Complex Plane, JCAP 07 (2014) 054 [1404.1832]

    2014 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Rehman and Q

    M.U. Rehman and Q. Shafi,Supersymmetric Hybrid Inflation in light of Atacama Cosmology Telescope Data Release 6, Planck 2018 and LB-BK18, 2504.14831

    2018 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Bastero-Gil, S.F

    M. Bastero-Gil, S.F. King and Q. Shafi,Supersymmetric Hybrid Inflation with Non-Minimal Kahler potential, Phys. Lett. B651 (2007) 345 [hep-ph/0604198]

    2007 arXiv

  4. [11]

    ur Rehman, V.N

    M. ur Rehman, V.N. Senoguz and Q. Shafi,Supersymmetric And Smooth Hybrid Inflation In The Light Of WMAP3, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 043522 [hep-ph/0612023]

    2007 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Moursy,No-scale hybrid inflation with R-symmetry breaking, JHEP 02 (2021) 230 [2009.14149]

    A. Moursy,No-scale hybrid inflation with R-symmetry breaking, JHEP 02 (2021) 230 [2009.14149]

    2021 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Moursy,No-scale gauge non-singlet inflation inducing TeV scale inverse seesaw mechanism, JHEP 10 (2021) 208 [2107.06670]

    A. Moursy,No-scale gauge non-singlet inflation inducing TeV scale inverse seesaw mechanism, JHEP 10 (2021) 208 [2107.06670]

    2021 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Ahmad and M.U

    M.N. Ahmad and M.U. Rehman,Supersymmetric Hybrid Inflation with Kähler-Induced R-Symmetry Breaking, 2506.23244

    arXiv

  8. [15]

    Ahmed, S.O

    W. Ahmed, S.O. Allehabi, F. Israr and M.U. Rehman,Tribrid Inflation, Type II Leptogenesis, and Observable Gravitational Waves in SU (3)c × SU (2)L × SU (2)R × U (1)B−L, 2507.05564

    arXiv

  9. [16]

    Pallis,F-Term Hybrid Inflation, Metastable Cosmic Strings and Low Reheating in View of ACT, in18th International Workshop on the Dark Side of the Universe, 4, 2025 [2504.20273]

    C. Pallis,F-Term Hybrid Inflation, Metastable Cosmic Strings and Low Reheating in View of ACT, in18th International Workshop on the Dark Side of the Universe, 4, 2025 [2504.20273]

    2025

  10. [17]

    Okada and O

    N. Okada and O. Seto,Smooth hybrid inflation in light of ACT DR6 data, 2506.15965

  11. [18]

    Clesse,Hybrid inflation along waterfall trajectories, Phys

    S. Clesse,Hybrid inflation along waterfall trajectories, Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 063518 [1006.4522]

    2011 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Kodama, K

    H. Kodama, K. Kohri and K. Nakayama,On the waterfall behavior in hybrid inflation, Prog. Theor. Phys.126 (2011) 331 [1102.5612]

    2011 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Clesse and B

    S. Clesse and B. Garbrecht,Slow Roll during the Waterfall Regime: The Small Coupling Window for SUSY Hybrid Inflation, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 023525 [1204.3540]

    2012 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Clesse and J

    S. Clesse and J. García-Bellido,Massive Primordial Black Holes from Hybrid Inflation – 20 – as Dark Matter and the seeds of Galaxies, Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 023524 [1501.07565]

    2015 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Moursy and Q

    A. Moursy and Q. Shafi,Primordial monopoles, black holes and gravitational waves, JCAP 08 (2024) 064 [2405.04397]

    2024 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Lazarides, R

    G. Lazarides, R. Maji, A. Moursy and Q. Shafi,Inflation, superheavy metastable strings and gravitational waves in non-supersymmetric flipped SU(5), JCAP 03 (2024) 006 [2308.07094]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [24]

    R. Maji, A. Moursy and Q. Shafi,Induced gravitational waves, metastable cosmic strings and primordial black holes in GUTs, JCAP 01 (2025) 106 [2409.13584]

    2025 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Spanos and I.D

    V.C. Spanos and I.D. Stamou,Gravitational waves and primordial black holes from supersymmetric hybrid inflation, Phys. Rev. D104 (2021) 123537 [2108.05671]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Afzal and A

    A. Afzal and A. Ghoshal,Primordial black holes and scalar-induced gravitational waves in radiative hybrid inflation, Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024) 983 [2402.06613]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Afzal, A

    A. Afzal, A. Ghoshal and S.F. King,Primordial black holes and scalar-induced gravitational waves in sneutrino hybrid inflation, Phys. Rev. D111 (2025) 023050 [2407.15082]

    2025 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Tada and M

    Y. Tada and M. Yamada,Primordial black hole formation in hybrid inflation, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 123539 [2304.01249]

    2023 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Tada and M

    Y. Tada and M. Yamada,Stochastic dynamics of multi-waterfall hybrid inflation and formation of primordial black holes, JCAP 11 (2023) 089 [2306.07324]

    2023 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Tada and M

    Y. Tada and M. Yamada,Multifield stochastic dynamics in GUT hybrid inflation without monopole problem and with gravitational wave signatures of GUT Higgs representation, Phys. Lett. B855 (2024) 138854 [2405.08859]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Braglia, A

    M. Braglia, A. Linde, R. Kallosh and F. Finelli,Hybrid α-attractors, primordial black holes and gravitational wave backgrounds, JCAP 04 (2023) 033 [2211.14262]

    2023 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Garcia-Bellido, A.D

    J. Garcia-Bellido, A.D. Linde and D. Wands,Density perturbations and black hole formation in hybrid inflation, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 6040 [astro-ph/9605094]

    1996 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Ananda, C

    K.N. Ananda, C. Clarkson and D. Wands,The Cosmological gravitational wave background from primordial density perturbations, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 123518 [gr-qc/0612013]

    2007 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Baumann, P.J

    D. Baumann, P.J. Steinhardt, K. Takahashi and K. Ichiki,Gravitational Wave Spectrum Induced by Primordial Scalar Perturbations, Phys. Rev. D76 (2007) 084019 [hep-th/0703290]

    2007 arXiv

  28. [35]

    De Luca, G

    V. De Luca, G. Franciolini and A. Riotto,NANOGrav Data Hints at Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.126 (2021) 041303 [2009.08268]. – 21 –

    2021 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Gross, Y

    M. Gross, Y. Mambrini, E. Kpatcha, M.O. Olea-Romacho and R. Roshan, Gravitational wave production during reheating: From the inflaton to primordial black holes, Phys. Rev. D111 (2025) 035020 [2411.04189]

    2025 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Maji and Q

    R. Maji and Q. Shafi,C-parity, magnetic monopoles, and higher frequency gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. D111 (2025) 075027 [2502.10135]

    2025 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Maji and Q

    R. Maji and Q. Shafi,Superheavy metastable strings in SO(10), JHEP 06 (2025) 217 [2504.09055]

    2025 arXiv

  32. [39]

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

    2023 arXiv

  33. [40]

    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

  34. [41]

    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

  35. [42]

    LISA Cosmology Working Group collaboration, Reconstructing primordial curvature perturbations via scalar-induced gravitational waves with LISA, JCAP 05 (2025) 062 [2501.11320]

    2025 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Bartolo et al.,Science with the space-based interferometer LISA

    N. Bartolo et al.,Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. IV: Probing inflation with gravitational waves, JCAP 12 (2016) 026 [1610.06481]

    2016 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Mentasti and M

    G. Mentasti and M. Peloso,ET sensitivity to the anisotropic Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background, JCAP 03 (2021) 080 [2010.00486]

    2021 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Sato et al.,The status of DECIGO, Journal of Physics: Conference Series840 (2017) 012010

    S. Sato et al.,The status of DECIGO, Journal of Physics: Conference Series840 (2017) 012010

    2017

  39. [46]

    Coleman and E.J

    S.R. Coleman and E.J. Weinberg,Radiative Corrections as the Origin of Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking, Phys. Rev. D7 (1973) 1888

    1973

  40. [47]

    Lazarides and C

    G. Lazarides and C. Panagiotakopoulos,Gravitational Waves from Double Hybrid Inflation, Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 123502 [1505.04926]

    2015 arXiv

  41. [48]

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

    2020 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Kolb and M.S

    E.W. Kolb and M.S. Turner,The Early Universe, Front. Phys.69 (1990) 1. – 22 –

    1990

  43. [51]

    Liddle and S.M

    A.R. Liddle and S.M. Leach,How long before the end of inflation were observable perturbations produced?, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 103503 [astro-ph/0305263]

    2003 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Ahmad, M

    M.N. Ahmad, M. Mehmood, M.U. Rehman and Q. Shafi,µ-hybrid inflation and metastable cosmic strings in SU(3)c×SU(2)L×SU(2)R×U(1)B-L, Phys. Rev. D111 (2025) 083526 [2501.06307]

    2025 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Starobinsky,Multicomponent de Sitter (Inflationary) Stages and the Generation of Perturbations, JETP Lett

    A.A. Starobinsky,Multicomponent de Sitter (Inflationary) Stages and the Generation of Perturbations, JETP Lett. 42 (1985) 152

    1985

  46. [54]

    Salopek and J.R

    D.S. Salopek and J.R. Bond,Nonlinear evolution of long wavelength metric fluctuations in inflationary models, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 3936

    1990

  47. [55]

    Sasaki and E.D

    M. Sasaki and E.D. Stewart,A General analytic formula for the spectral index of the density perturbations produced during inflation, Prog. Theor. Phys.95 (1996) 71 [astro-ph/9507001]

    1996 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Sasaki and T

    M. Sasaki and T. Tanaka,Superhorizon scale dynamics of multiscalar inflation, Prog. Theor. Phys. 99 (1998) 763 [gr-qc/9801017]

    1998 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Lyth, K.A

    D.H. Lyth, K.A. Malik and M. Sasaki,A General proof of the conservation of the curvature perturbation, JCAP 05 (2005) 004 [astro-ph/0411220]

    2005 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Sugiyama, E

    N.S. Sugiyama, E. Komatsu and T. Futamase,δN formalism, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 023530 [1208.1073]

    2013 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Kawasaki and Y

    M. Kawasaki and Y. Tada,Can massive primordial black holes be produced in mild waterfall hybrid inflation?, JCAP 08 (2016) 041 [1512.03515]

    2016 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Vennin and A.A

    V. Vennin and A.A. Starobinsky,Correlation Functions in Stochastic Inflation, Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 413 [1506.04732]

    2015 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Assadullahi, H

    H. Assadullahi, H. Firouzjahi, M. Noorbala, V. Vennin and D. Wands,Multiple Fields in Stochastic Inflation, JCAP 06 (2016) 043 [1604.04502]

    2016 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Ringeval,The exact numerical treatment of inflationary models, Lect

    C. Ringeval,The exact numerical treatment of inflationary models, Lect. Notes Phys. 738 (2008) 243 [astro-ph/0703486]

    2008 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Clesse, B

    S. Clesse, B. Garbrecht and Y. Zhu,Non-Gaussianities and Curvature Perturbations from Hybrid Inflation, Phys. Rev. D89 (2014) 063519 [1304.7042]

    2014 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Ellis, J.E

    J.R. Ellis, J.E. Kim and D.V. Nanopoulos,Cosmological Gravitino Regeneration and Decay, Phys. Lett. B145 (1984) 181

    1984

  57. [65]

    Moroi, H

    T. Moroi, H. Murayama and M. Yamaguchi,Cosmological constraints on the light stable gravitino, Phys. Lett. B303 (1993) 289

    1993

  58. [66]

    Kawasaki, K

    M. Kawasaki, K. Kohri and T. Moroi,Hadronic decay of late - decaying particles and Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis, Phys. Lett. B625 (2005) 7 [astro-ph/0402490]. – 23 –

    2005 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Ellis, S

    J.R. Ellis, S. Kelley and D.V. Nanopoulos,Probing the desert using gauge coupling unification, Phys. Lett. B260 (1991) 131

    1991

  60. [68]

    Amaldi, W

    U. Amaldi, W. de Boer, P.H. Frampton, H. Furstenau and J.T. Liu,Consistency checks of grand unified theories, Phys. Lett. B281 (1992) 374

    1992

  61. [69]

    Langacker and M.-x

    P. Langacker and M.-x. Luo,Implications of precision electroweak experiments forMt, ρ0, sin2 θW and grand unification, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 817

    1991

  62. [70]

    Amaldi, W

    U. Amaldi, W. de Boer and H. Furstenau,Comparison of grand unified theories with electroweak and strong coupling constants measured at LEP, Phys. Lett. B260 (1991) 447

    1991

  63. [71]

    Chakrabortty, R

    J. Chakrabortty, R. Maji, S.K. Patra, T. Srivastava and S. Mohanty,Roadmap of left-right models based on GUTs, Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) 095010 [1711.11391]

    2018 arXiv

  64. [72]

    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]

    1996 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Nakama, T

    T. Nakama, T. Suyama and J. Yokoyama,Reheating the Universe Once More: The Dissipation of Acoustic Waves as a Novel Probe of Primordial Inhomogeneities on Even Smaller Scales, Phys. Rev. Lett.113 (2014) 061302 [1403.5407]

    2014 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Kogut et al.,The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): A Nulling Polarimeter for Cosmic Microwave Background Observations, JCAP 07 (2011) 025 [1105.2044]

    A. Kogut et al.,The Primordial Inflation Explorer (PIXIE): A Nulling Polarimeter for Cosmic Microwave Background Observations, JCAP 07 (2011) 025 [1105.2044]

    2011 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Green and B.J

    A.M. Green and B.J. Kavanagh,Primordial Black Holes as a dark matter candidate, J. Phys. G 48 (2021) 043001 [2007.10722]

    2021 arXiv

  68. [76]

    ’t Hooft,Magnetic Monopoles in Unified Gauge Theories, Nucl

    G. ’t Hooft,Magnetic Monopoles in Unified Gauge Theories, Nucl. Phys. B 79 (1974) 276

    1974

  69. [77]

    Polyakov,Particle Spectrum in the Quantum Field Theory, JETP Lett

    A.M. Polyakov,Particle Spectrum in the Quantum Field Theory, JETP Lett. 20 (1974) 194

    1974

  70. [78]

    Lazarides, M

    G. Lazarides, M. Magg and Q. Shafi,Phase Transitions and Magnetic Monopoles in SO(10), Phys. Lett. B97 (1980) 87

    1980

  71. [79]

    Shafi and C

    Q. Shafi and C. Wetterich,Magnetic Monopoles in Grand Unified and Kaluza-Klein Theories, NATO Sci. Ser. B111 (1984) 47

    1984

  72. [80]

    Maji and Q

    R. Maji and Q. Shafi,Monopoles, strings and gravitational waves in non-minimal inflation, JCAP 03 (2023) 007 [2208.08137]

    2023 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Lazarides,Inflation, in6th BCSPIN Kathmandu Summer School in Physics: Current Trends in High-Energy Physics and Cosmology, 5, 1997 [hep-ph/9802415]

    G. Lazarides,Inflation, in6th BCSPIN Kathmandu Summer School in Physics: Current Trends in High-Energy Physics and Cosmology, 5, 1997 [hep-ph/9802415]

    1997 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Lazarides,Inflationary cosmology, Lect

    G. Lazarides,Inflationary cosmology, Lect. Notes Phys.592 (2002) 351 [hep-ph/0111328]. – 24 –

    2002 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Parker,The Origin of Magnetic Fields, Astrophys

    E.N. Parker,The Origin of Magnetic Fields, Astrophys. J. 160 (1970) 383

    1970

  76. [84]

    Turner, E.N

    M.S. Turner, E.N. Parker and T.J. Bogdan,Magnetic Monopoles and the Survival of Galactic Magnetic Fields, Phys. Rev. D26 (1982) 1296

    1982

  77. [85]

    Adams, M

    F.C. Adams, M. Fatuzzo, K. Freese, G. Tarle, R. Watkins and M.S. Turner,Extension of the Parker bound on the flux of magnetic monopoles, Phys. Rev. Lett.70 (1993) 2511

    1993

  78. [86]

    Lewis, K

    M.J. Lewis, K. Freese and G. Tarle,Protogalactic extension of the Parker bound, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 025002 [astro-ph/9911095]

    2000 arXiv

  79. [87]

    MACRO collaboration, Final results of magnetic monopole searches with the MACRO experiment, Eur. Phys. J. C25 (2002) 511 [hep-ex/0207020]

    2002 arXiv

  80. [88]

    IceCube collaboration, Search for Relativistic Magnetic Monopoles with Eight Years of IceCube Data, Phys. Rev. Lett.128 (2022) 051101 [2109.13719]

    2022

  81. [89]

    Price, S.-l

    P.B. Price, S.-l. Guo, S.P. Ahlen and R.L. Fleischer,Search for GUT Magnetic Monopoles at a Flux Level Below the Parker Limit, Phys. Rev. Lett.52 (1984) 1265

    1984

  82. [90]

    Kajita et al.,SEARCH FOR NUCLEON DECAYS CATALYZED BY MAGNETIC MONOPOLES, J

    T. Kajita et al.,SEARCH FOR NUCLEON DECAYS CATALYZED BY MAGNETIC MONOPOLES, J. Phys. Soc. Jap.54 (1985) 4065

    1985

  83. [91]

    Soudan-1 collaboration, Monopole Flux and Proton Decay Limits From the Soudan-I Detector, Phys. Rev. D36 (1987) 1990

    1987

  84. [92]

    Becker-Szendy et al.,New magnetic monopole flux limits from the IMB proton decay detector, Phys

    R. Becker-Szendy et al.,New magnetic monopole flux limits from the IMB proton decay detector, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 2169

    1994

  85. [93]

    MACRO collaboration, Search for nucleon decays induced by GUT magnetic monopoles with the MACRO experiment, Eur. Phys. J. C26 (2002) 163 [hep-ex/0207024]

    2002 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Phys.36 (2012) 131 [1203.0940]

    Super-Kamiokande collaboration, Search for GUT monopoles at Super–Kamiokande, Astropart. Phys.36 (2012) 131 [1203.0940]

    2012 arXiv

  87. [95]

    ANTAREScollaboration, Search for magnetic monopoles with ten years of the ANTARES neutrino telescope, JHEAp 34 (2022) 1 [2202.13786]

    2022

  88. [96]

    Lewicki, O

    M. Lewicki, O. Pujolàs and V. Vaskonen,Escape from supercooling with or without bubbles: gravitational wave signatures, Eur. Phys. J. C81 (2021) 857 [2106.09706]

    2021 arXiv

  89. [97]

    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

  90. [98]

    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]. – 25 –

    2018 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Inomata and T

    K. Inomata and T. Terada,Gauge Independence of Induced Gravitational Waves, Phys. Rev. D101 (2020) 023523 [1912.00785]

    2020 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Amaro-Seoane et al.,Laser interferometer space antenna, 1702.00786

    P. Amaro-Seoane et al.,Laser interferometer space antenna, 1702.00786

    arXiv

  93. [101]

    Rel.21 (2018) 3 [1304.0670]

    KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, Virgo, VIRGO collaboration, Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and KAGRA, Living Rev. Rel.21 (2018) 3 [1304.0670]

    2018 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Regimbau, M

    T. Regimbau, M. Evans, N. Christensen, E. Katsavounidis, B. Sathyaprakash and S. Vitale,Digging deeper: Observing primordial gravitational waves below the binary black hole produced stochastic background, Phys. Rev. Lett.118 (2017) 151105 [1611.08943]

    2017 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Badurina, E

    L. Badurina, E. Bentine, D. Blas, K. Bongs, D. Bortoletto, T. Bowcock et al.,Aion: an atom interferometer observatory and network, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2020 (2020) 011–011

    2020

  96. [104]

    Crowder and N.J

    J. Crowder and N.J. Cornish,Beyond LISA: Exploring future gravitational wave missions, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 083005 [gr-qc/0506015]

    2005 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Corbin and N.J

    V. Corbin and N.J. Cornish,Detecting the cosmic gravitational wave background with the big bang observer, Class. Quant. Grav.23 (2006) 2435 [gr-qc/0512039]

    2006 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Technol.7 (2020) 6 [1908.00802]

    AEDGE collaboration, AEDGE: Atomic Experiment for Dark Matter and Gravity Exploration in Space, EPJ Quant. Technol.7 (2020) 6 [1908.00802]

    2020 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Sesana et al.,Unveiling the gravitational universe atµ-Hz frequencies, Exper

    A. Sesana et al.,Unveiling the gravitational universe atµ-Hz frequencies, Exper. Astron. 51 (2021) 1333 [1908.11391]

    2021 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Dewdney, P.J

    P.E. Dewdney, P.J. Hall, R.T. Schilizzi and T.J.L.W. Lazio,The square kilometre array, Proceedings of the IEEE97 (2009) 1482

    2009

  101. [109]

    Janssen et al.,Gravitational wave astronomy with the SKA, PoS AASKA14 (2015) 037 [1501.00127]

    G. Janssen et al.,Gravitational wave astronomy with the SKA, PoS AASKA14 (2015) 037 [1501.00127]

    2015 arXiv

  102. [110]

    NANOGra vcollaboration, The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Search for Signals from New Physics, Astrophys. J. Lett.951 (2023) L11 [2306.16219]

    2023 arXiv

  103. [111]

    The dataset and timing analysis, Astron

    EPTAcollaboration, The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array - I. The dataset and timing analysis, Astron. Astrophys.678 (2023) A48 [2306.16224]. – 26 –

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

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