pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.03866 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-04 · ✦ hep-ph · astro-ph.CO· gr-qc· hep-th

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

What spectators do during inflation

Daniel Boyanovsky
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 16:47 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph astro-ph.COgr-qchep-th
keywords inflationspectator fieldsradiative correctionsdynamical renormalization groupSudakov logarithmsinflaton equation of motionparticle productionslow roll
0
0 comments X

The pith

One-loop corrections from spectator fields resum via dynamical renormalization group to give the inflaton an exponential factor quadratic in the number of e-folds.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper derives the fully renormalized one-loop equation of motion for the inflaton including contributions from a conformally coupled massless scalar and a Yukawa-coupled massless fermion. Solving the equation for a quadratic potential reveals secular logarithmic terms that are resummed by the dynamical renormalization group, producing an overall multiplicative factor exp(Υ N_e²) with Υ fixed by the coupling strengths. This quadratic-exponential evolution differs from the linear-in-N_e damping produced by any phenomenological friction term, demonstrating that friction approximations do not capture the dynamics. The same framework yields the time-dependent distribution of produced spectators, peaked on superhorizon scales, with their total number growing as e^{3 N_e}. A non-perturbative mean-field theory is introduced whose linearization recovers the one-loop results.

Core claim

The one-loop self-energy of the inflaton in the presence of bosonic or fermionic spectators generates Sudakov-type logarithmic secular terms. These terms are resummed with the dynamical renormalization group, so that the inflaton evolves as φ^{(0)}_{Isr}(t) times e^{Υ N_e²}, where Υ equals -λ²/(24 π² H²) for bosons and y_R²/(12 π²) for fermions. The solution is compared to the one obtained with a friction term Γ and shown to be qualitatively different. A generalization of the optical theorem supplies the distribution function f(k,t) and the total number of spectators produced during slow roll.

What carries the argument

Dynamical renormalization group resummation of the secular logarithms that appear in the one-loop self-energy of the inflaton.

If this is right

  • The inflaton amplitude is multiplied by e to the power Υ N_e squared instead of the factor obtained from any constant friction coefficient.
  • The total number of spectator particles grows proportionally to e to the power 3 N_e.
  • The momentum distribution of produced spectators is peaked at superhorizon wavelengths.
  • The linearized non-perturbative mean-field equations reproduce both the resummed inflaton motion and the particle number.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The quadratic-exponential factor could shift the total number of e-folds required to solve the horizon problem or modify the amplitude of curvature perturbations.
  • The same secular-term structure is expected in other models with light fields coupled to the inflaton, suggesting that effective friction descriptions should be replaced by explicit resummation in general.
  • Higher-order quantum corrections may eventually dominate and set an upper limit on the number of e-folds over which the one-loop result applies.
  • The distribution function f(k,t) supplies initial conditions for post-inflationary evolution of the spectator sector.

Load-bearing premise

Spectators are produced only through their direct coupling to the inflaton and carry no gravitational particle production, while one-loop perturbation theory remains valid for many e-folds.

What would settle it

An explicit computation of the two-loop self-energy or a lattice simulation that shows the inflaton evolution follows the linear-in-N_e friction form rather than the quadratic-exponential form, or that higher-order corrections become order-one before the end of slow roll.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.03866 by Daniel Boyanovsky.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Interaction vertices with the composite operator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Representation of the diagrams leading to the equation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The function Ω(q) (VI.13) for β− = −1 vs. q. Remarkably, the distribution function is strongly peaked at superhorizon wavelengths kph(η)/H → 0. In Minkowski space time the relation N (t) = 2P0→2(t) of course still holds, therefore equations (A.30,A.35) yield the distribution function FM ink[k;t] ≡ (2π) 3 V dN (t) d 3k = λ 2 k 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The inflaton equation of motion including one loop radiative corrections from spectator fields is obtained. We consider a massless scalar conformally coupled to gravity and a massless fermion Yukawa coupled to the inflaton as models for spectators that \emph{do not feature} gravitational particle production, their production during slow roll is solely a consequence of their coupling to the inflaton. The one-loop self energy and the fully renormalized equation of motion of the inflaton are obtained and solved explicitly for an inflaton potential $m^2\varphi^2/2$. The solution features Sudakov-type logarithmic secular terms, which are resumed via the dynamical renormalization group and compared to the solutions with a phenomenological friction term. During $N_e$ e-folds of slow roll inflation the inflaton evolves as $\varphi^{(0)}_{Isr}(t)\,e^{\frac{m^2\Gamma}{9H^3}\,N_e(t)}$ for the phenomenological friction term $\Gamma$ and $\varphi^{(0)}_{Isr}(t)\,e^{\Upsilon N^2_e}$ with $\Upsilon = -\frac{\lambda^2}{24\pi^2 H^2} ; \frac{y^2_R}{12\pi^2}$ for the radiative corrections from bosonic and fermionic spectators respectively where $\varphi^{(0)}_{Isr}(t)$ is the slow roll solution in absence of interactions, showing that a phenomenological friction term is not reliable. A generalization of the optical theorem to a finite time domain and cosmological expansion is introduced to obtain the distribution function $f(k,t)$ and total number of spectators produced \emph{during slow roll}. $f(k,t)$ is peaked at superhorizon scales and the total number of particles grows $\propto e^{3N_e}$. A non-perturbative mean field theory is introduced to describe the self-consistent evolution of the inflaton coupled to spectators, its linearized version reproduces the self-energy, the inflaton equation of motion and the results on particle production.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes the one-loop self-energy corrections to the inflaton equation of motion arising from massless spectator fields (a conformally coupled scalar with quartic coupling λ and a Yukawa-coupled fermion with coupling y_R) that experience no gravitational particle production. For the quadratic potential m²φ²/2, the solution contains Sudakov-type secular logarithms that are resummed via the dynamical renormalization group, yielding an inflaton trajectory φ⁰_Isr(t) exp(Υ N_e²) with Υ = −λ²/(24π² H²) for bosons and y_R²/(12π²) for fermions. This functional form is contrasted with the linear-in-N_e growth produced by a phenomenological friction term Γ, leading to the conclusion that such friction terms are unreliable. The paper also introduces a finite-time generalization of the optical theorem to obtain the spectator distribution f(k,t) (peaked at superhorizon scales with total number density growing ∝ e^{3N_e}) and a non-perturbative mean-field theory whose linearization recovers the one-loop results.

Significance. If the one-loop resummation remains valid over the relevant range of e-folds, the result demonstrates that radiative corrections from spectators generate a qualitatively different inflaton evolution than phenomenological friction models, with potential implications for the accuracy of slow-roll predictions and the interpretation of spectator-induced effects in inflationary observables. The explicit particle-production calculation and the mean-field formulation provide concrete, falsifiable outputs that can be tested against lattice or higher-order methods.

major comments (2)
  1. [DRG resummation and inflaton solution] The central claim that phenomenological friction terms are unreliable rests on the N_e² versus linear-N_e distinction after DRG resummation. However, the manuscript provides no explicit error estimate or radius-of-convergence analysis for the one-loop approximation when secular terms grow as N_e² (see the solution after the self-energy computation and the DRG section). Without such bounds, it is unclear whether higher-loop contributions remain subdominant before the end of the 50–60 e-folds of interest, which directly affects the reliability conclusion.
  2. [Optical theorem generalization and particle production] The assumption that spectators are produced solely by their coupling to the inflaton (no gravitational production) is stated in the abstract and used throughout the optical-theorem generalization. This is load-bearing for the particle-number result ∝ e^{3N_e} and for the back-reaction assessment; a brief quantitative check that gravitational production remains negligible for the chosen conformal masses and couplings would strengthen the claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and main result paragraph] The two expressions for Υ are given with a semicolon; a short clause clarifying that the first applies to the bosonic spectator and the second to the fermionic spectator would improve readability.
  2. [Inflaton solution paragraph] Notation for the slow-roll background solution φ⁰_Isr(t) is introduced without an explicit equation reference; adding a parenthetical pointer to its definition would help readers trace the multiplicative correction factor.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below and will incorporate revisions to strengthen the presentation of the results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that phenomenological friction terms are unreliable rests on the N_e² versus linear-N_e distinction after DRG resummation. However, the manuscript provides no explicit error estimate or radius-of-convergence analysis for the one-loop approximation when secular terms grow as N_e² (see the solution after the self-energy computation and the DRG section). Without such bounds, it is unclear whether higher-loop contributions remain subdominant before the end of the 50–60 e-folds of interest, which directly affects the reliability conclusion.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit discussion of the validity range would strengthen the reliability conclusion. In the revised manuscript we will add a paragraph in the DRG section that estimates the regime of validity by requiring that the resummed one-loop correction |Υ|N_e² remains perturbatively small compared to the tree-level slow-roll evolution. For the couplings considered (λ, y_R ≪ 1) this condition holds comfortably for N_e ≲ 60, while higher-loop secular terms enter only at O(λ³, y_R³) and are parametrically suppressed. This clarifies that the N_e² versus linear-N_e distinction is trustworthy within the stated parameter space. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The assumption that spectators are produced solely by their coupling to the inflaton (no gravitational production) is stated in the abstract and used throughout the optical-theorem generalization. This is load-bearing for the particle-number result ∝ e^{3N_e} and for the back-reaction assessment; a brief quantitative check that gravitational production remains negligible for the chosen conformal masses and couplings would strengthen the claim.

    Authors: The models are deliberately chosen (massless conformally coupled scalar and massless Yukawa fermion) so that the gravitational production amplitude vanishes identically in exact de Sitter space. To make this explicit, the revised manuscript will include a short paragraph (or appendix note) that recalls the standard result for the Bogoliubov coefficient in the conformal massless limit and shows that any small deviation from conformal coupling or masslessness produces a particle number density suppressed by factors of (m/H)^2 or (1-ξ)^2, which is exponentially smaller than the interaction-driven ∝ e^{3N_e} growth for the parameter values used. This confirms that the reported distribution and number density are indeed interaction-induced. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: derivation self-contained from explicit one-loop computation

full rationale

The paper derives the inflaton equation of motion from the one-loop self-energy of conformally coupled massless spectators (bosonic scalar or Yukawa fermion) in de Sitter space, explicitly computes the retarded self-energy integral yielding Sudakov logarithms, solves the resulting integro-differential equation for the quadratic inflaton potential, and applies the dynamical renormalization group to resum the secular terms into the quadratic exponential form exp(Υ N_e²) with Υ coefficients obtained directly from the loop integrals. This is compared term-by-term to the distinct linear-in-N_e solution obtained by inserting a phenomenological friction term Γ into the same equation. The optical theorem generalization and mean-field ansatz are introduced separately to compute the spectator distribution f(k,t) and are not required for the central self-energy or resummation steps. No step reduces by definition to a fitted input, self-citation chain, or ansatz smuggled from prior work; all functional forms follow from the explicit perturbative calculation under the stated assumptions of conformal spectators and one-loop validity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard quantum field theory in an expanding background and the slow-roll regime; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • quartic coupling λ
    Free parameter in the scalar spectator model that enters the one-loop self-energy and the coefficient Υ.
  • Yukawa coupling y_R
    Free parameter in the fermionic spectator model that enters the one-loop self-energy and the coefficient Υ.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Slow-roll approximation holds throughout the N_e e-folds considered
    Invoked to solve the renormalized equation of motion and compute particle production during inflation.
  • domain assumption One-loop perturbation theory is sufficient and secular terms can be resummed via dynamical RG
    Used to obtain the self-energy and the resummed solution for the inflaton.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5659 in / 1521 out tokens · 56514 ms · 2026-05-13T16:47:46.650900+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Bosonic spectator: The bosonic self-energy is simply given by eqn. (IV.94) with the replacements (IV.117), namely ˜Σ(t − t′) = − λ 2 4π 2 t − t′ (t − t′)2 +ǫ2 = λ 2 8π 2 d dt′ ln [ (t − t′)2 +ǫ2 t2 ∗ ] ; ǫ → 0, (IV.119) where t∗ is a scale introduced to render dimensionless the argument o f the logarithm. Integrating by parts ∫ t t0 ˜Σ(t−t′) X (t′)dt′ = λ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    (IV.130) Therefore, in the long time limit F(t) − − − − − − → mRT ≫ 1 ln ( µ mR ) − γ +iπ

    work page

  3. [3]

    (IV.131) We note that after mass renormalization, the right hand side of the first order equation is ultraviolet finite. The solution to the first order equation (IV.128) is X (1)(t) = 2 ∫ ∞ t0 GR(t − t′) [ Xe −imRt′ F(t′) +X ∗eimRt′ F ∗(t′) ] dt′, (IV.132) where the retarded Green’s function of the differential opera tor on the left hand side of (IV.128) is ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    infrared

    Fermionic spectator: The fermionic self energy is obtained from (IV.106) by the re placement (IV.117), yielding ˜Σf (t − t′) = y2 4π 2 d2 dt ′ 2 [ t − t′ (t − t′)2 +ǫ2 ] = − y2 8π 2 d3 dt ′ 3 ln [ (t − t′)2 +ǫ2 t2 ∗ ] . (IV.135) Integrating by parts, and neglecting boundary terms ∝ 1/ (t − t0), 1/ (t − t0)2 → 0 as t − t0 → ∞ , we find ∫ t t0 ˜Σf (t − t′)X(...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Bosonic correlations Using Wick’s theorem, we find ⟨0s|: (χs(⃗ x,η))2 : : (χs(⃗ x′,η ′))2 : |0s⟩ = 2G> s (⃗ x,⃗ x′;η,η ′) (A.1) where G> s (⃗ x,⃗ x′;η,η ′) = ⟨0s|χs(⃗ x,η)χs(⃗ x′,η ′)|0s⟩ ⟨0s|χs(⃗ x,η)χs(⃗ x′,η ′)|0s⟩ (A.2) it is convenient to also introduce G< s (⃗ x,⃗ x′;η,η ′) = ⟨0s|χs(⃗ x′,η ′)χs(⃗ x,η)|0s⟩ ⟨0s|χs(⃗ x′,η ′)χs(⃗ x,η)|0s⟩, (A.3) since χs...

    work page

  6. [6]

    F ermion correlations. Defining G> f (⃗ x,⃗ x′;η,η ′) ≡ ⟨ 0F |:ψ (⃗ x,η)ψ (⃗ x,η) :: ψ (⃗ x′,η ′)ψ (⃗ x′,η ′) : |0F ⟩, (A.6) G< f (⃗ x,⃗ x′;η,η ′) ≡ ⟨ 0F |:ψ (⃗ x′,η ′)ψ (⃗ x′,η ′) :: ψ (⃗ x,η)ψ (⃗ x,η) : |0F ⟩, (A.7) and introducing the projectors Λ + ab(⃗k,η,η ′) = ∑ λ =1, 2 Uλ,a (⃗k,η ) Uλ,b (⃗k,η ′) = fk(η)f ∗ k (η′) 2k2   Ω(k,η )Ω ∗(k,η ′) I − Ω(k,η...

    work page

  7. [7]

    In this appendix we analyze the optical theorem in a finite tim e interval in Minkowski space-time with a straightforward generalization to the cosmological case

    Optical theorem with condensates in real time. In this appendix we analyze the optical theorem in a finite tim e interval in Minkowski space-time with a straightforward generalization to the cosmological case. The time evolution operator in the interaction picture UI (t,t 0) is unitary, namely UI (t,t 0)U †(t,t 0) = UI (t,t 0)U − 1(t,t 0) = 1 obeying i d d...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Hinshaw et.al

    G. Hinshaw et.al. WMAP collaboration Astrophys.J.Suppl. 208, 19, (2013),

    work page 2013

  9. [9]

    Planck 2015 results. XX. Constraints on inflation

    P.A.R. de Ade et. al. Planck collaboration Astron.Astrophys. 571 ) A16 (2014); arXiv:1502.02114

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  10. [10]

    Dolgov and D

    A. Dolgov and D. Kirilova, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 51 (1990) 172

    work page 1990

  11. [11]

    Kofman, A

    L. Kofman, A. Linde, A. Starobinsky, Phys.Rev.Lett.73, 3195 (1 994); Phys.Rev.D56, 3258 (1997)

    work page 1997

  12. [12]

    Shtanov, J

    Y. Shtanov, J. Trashen, R. Brandenberger, Phys.Rev. D51 54 38, (1995)

    work page 1995

  13. [13]

    Kofman, arXiv:astro-ph/9605155 ; L

    L. Kofman, arXiv:astro-ph/9605155 ; L. Kofman, arXiv:hep-ph /9802285 ; L. Kofman, P. Yi, Phys.Rev.D72, 106001 (2005); ; L. Kofman, arXiv:astro-ph/9605 155

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2005

  14. [14]

    R. H. Brandenberger, arXiv:hep-ph/9701276; R. Brandenber ger, J. Traschen, arXiv:2602.16963

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

  15. [15]

    Allahverdi, R

    R. Allahverdi, R. Brandenberger, F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, A. Mazumda r, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60, 27 (2010)

    work page 2010

  16. [16]

    Finelli, R

    F. Finelli, R. Brandenberger, Phys.Rev.D62, 083502 (2000); Phy s.Rev.Lett.82, 1362 (1999)

    work page 2000

  17. [17]

    M. A. Amin, M. P. Hertzberg, D. I. Kaiser, J. Karouby, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24, 1530003 (2015); D. Kaiser, Phys.Rev. D53, 1776 (1996)

    work page 2015

  18. [18]

    Barnaby, J

    N. Barnaby, J. Braden, L. Kofman, JCAP 1007:016,2010

    work page 2010

  19. [19]

    P. B. Greene, L. Kofman, Phys.Lett. B448, 6 (1999); Phys.Re v. D62 123516 (2000)

    work page 1999

  20. [20]

    Peloso, L

    M. Peloso, L. Sorbo, JHEP 0005 (2000) 016

    work page 2000

  21. [21]

    Tsujikawa, B

    S. Tsujikawa, B. A. Bassett, F. Viniegra, JHEP 0008 (2000) 01 9

    work page 2000

  22. [22]

    Garcia-Bellido, S

    J. Garcia-Bellido, S. Mollerach, E. Roulet, JHEP 0002 (2000) 034 . 59

    work page 2000

  23. [23]

    Berges, D

    J. Berges, D. Gelfand, J. Pruschke, Phys.Rev.Lett.107, 0613 01 (2011)

    work page 2011

  24. [24]

    Friedrich, T

    P. Friedrich, T. Prokopec, Phys. Rev. D 100, 083505 (2019)

    work page 2019

  25. [25]

    X. Chen, G. A. Palma, W.Riquelme, B. S. Hitschfeld, S. Sypsas, Ph ys. Rev. D 98, 083528 (2018)

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Dimastrogiovanni, M

    E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, and T. Fujita, JCAP 01, 019 (20 17)

    work page

  27. [27]

    McDonough, S

    E. McDonough, S. Alexander, JCAP 11, 030 (2018)

    work page 2018

  28. [28]

    Holland, I

    J. Holland, I. Zavala, G. Tasinato, JCAP 12, 026 (2020)

    work page 2020

  29. [29]

    Alexander, E

    S. Alexander, E. McDonough, D. N. Spergel, JCAP 05, 003 (201 8)

    work page

  30. [30]

    D. L. Lorenzoni, S. R. Geller, D. I. Kaiser, E. McDonough, arXiv :2512.04199; D. L. Lorenzoni, S. R. Geller, Z. Ireland, D. I. Kaiser, E. McDonough, K. A. Wittmeier, arX iv:2504.13251

    work page arXiv

  31. [31]

    M. A. G. Garcia, S. Verner, arXiv:2512.04240

    work page arXiv

  32. [32]

    R. J. Hardwick, V. Vennin, C. T. Byrnes, J. Torrado, D. Wands , JCAP10(2017)018

    work page 2017

  33. [33]

    R. J. Hardwick JCAP 05 (2018) 054

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    Turok, Phys

    N. Turok, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 (1988) 549

    work page 1988

  35. [35]

    Damour, A

    T. Damour, A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D53 2981 (1996)

    work page 1996

  36. [36]

    Kachru, R

    S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A. D. Linde, J. M. Maldacena, L. P. McAllist er and S. P. Trivedi, JCAP 0310 (2003) 013

    work page 2003

  37. [37]

    A. Shah, K. Jay, M. Khlopov, O. Trivedi, M. Krasnov, arXiv: 251 2.21658

    work page

  38. [38]

    E. W. Kolb, M. S. Turner, The Early Universe (Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading Mas- sachusetts, 1994)

    work page 1994

  39. [39]

    Berera, L.-Z

    A. Berera, L.-Z. Fang, Phys.Rev.Lett. 74, 1912 (1995); A. Be rera, Phys.Rev.Lett.75, 3218 (1995); A. Berera, I. G. Moss, R. O. Ramos, Rept.Prog.Phys.72,026901 (2009 )

    work page 1912

  40. [40]

    S. Cao, D. Boyanovsky, Phys. Rev. D109 105021 (2024)

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    Parker, Phys

    L. Parker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 21, 562 (1968); Phys. Rev. 183 , 1057 (1969); Phys. Rev. D 3, 346 (1971); arXiv:2507.05372

    work page arXiv 1968

  42. [42]

    L. H. Ford, Phys. Rev. D35, 2955 (1987); Rept. Prog. Phys. 84, 116901 (2021)

    work page 1987

  43. [43]

    Parker, D

    L. Parker, D. Toms, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Space Time: Quantized fields a nd Gravity , (Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics) (Cambridge Univ ersity Press, Cambridge, UK) (2009)

    work page 2009

  44. [44]

    N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies, Quantum fields in curved space , Cambridge Monographs in Mathe- matical Physics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982

    work page 1982

  45. [45]

    S. A. Fulling, Aspects of Quantum Field Theory in curved Space-Time (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989)

    work page 1989

  46. [46]

    E. W. Kolb and A. J. Long, Rev. Mod. Phys. 96, 045005 (2024)

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    Agullo, L

    I. Agullo, L. Parker, Gen.Rel.Grav. 43 2541 (2011); Phys.Rev.D8 3 063526 (2011)

    work page 2011

  48. [48]

    Schwinger, J

    J. Schwinger, J. Math. Phys. 2, 407 (1961)

    work page 1961

  49. [49]

    Keldysh, Zh.Eksp.Teor.Fiz

    L. Keldysh, Zh.Eksp.Teor.Fiz. 47, 1515 (1964)

    work page 1964

  50. [50]

    P. M. Bakshi and K. T. Mahanthappa, J.Math.Phys. 41 (1963), J.Math.Phys. 4 12 (1963). 60

    work page 1963

  51. [51]

    R. D. Jordan, Phys. Rev. D33, 444 (1986)

    work page 1986

  52. [52]

    Calzetta, B.-L

    E. Calzetta, B.-L. Hu, Nonequilibrium Quantum Field Theory , (Cambridge Monographs on Mathemat- ical Physics; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008)

    work page 2008

  53. [53]

    Boyanovsky, H

    D. Boyanovsky, H. J. de Vega, Annals Phys. 307, 335 (2003); D. Boyanovsky, H. J. de Vega, S.-Y. Wang, Phys.Rev.D67, 065022 (2003); S. -Y. Wang, D. Boyanovsky, H. J. de Vega, D. -S. Lee, Phys.Rev. D62, 105026 (2000)

    work page 2003

  54. [54]

    Boyanovsky, H

    D. Boyanovsky, H. J. de Vega, Phys.Rev. D70, 063508 (2004) ; D. Boyanovsky, H. J. de Vega, N. G. Sanchez, Phys.Rev. D71,023509 (2005)

    work page 2004

  55. [55]

    Green, A

    D. Green, A. Premkumar, J.High Energ.Phys.2020, 064 (2020)

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    Weinberg, Gravitation and Cosmology: principles and applications of the general theory of relativity

    S. Weinberg, Gravitation and Cosmology: principles and applications of the general theory of relativity. John Wiley and sons, N.Y. 1972

    work page 1972

  57. [57]

    Duncan, Phys

    A. Duncan, Phys. Rev. D17, 964 (1978)

    work page 1978

  58. [58]

    M. A. Castagnino, L. Chimento, D. D. Harari and C. Nunez, J. M ath. Phys. 25, 360 (1984)

    work page 1984

  59. [59]

    Baacke, C

    J. Baacke, C. Patzold, Phys. Rev. D62, 084008 (2000)

    work page 2000

  60. [60]

    Boyanovsky, H

    D. Boyanovsky, H. J. de Vega, Phys.Rev. D47, 2343 (1993); D . Boyanovsky, H. J. de Vega, R. Holman, D. S-Lee, A. Singh, Phys.Rev. D51 4419, (1995); D. Boyanovsky, M. D’attanasio, H. J. de Vega, R. Holman, D. -S. Lee, Phys.Rev. D52, 6805 (1995)

    work page 1993

  61. [61]

    M. E. Peskin, D. V. Schroeder, An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory (Advanced Book Program, Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. Reading, Massachusetts, 1995)

    work page 1995

  62. [62]

    R. P. Woodard, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 148, 108 (2005); S. P. Miao, N. C. Tsamis, R. P. Woodard, arXiv:2601.09309; JHEP07, 099 (2024); Class. Quant. Grav. 41, 2 15007 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2005

  63. [63]

    N. C. Tsamis, R. P. Woodard, Annals Phys. 238, 1 (1995)

    work page 1995

  64. [64]

    Glavan, S

    D. Glavan, S. P. Miao, T. Prokopec, R. P. Woodard, JHEP 03 088 (2022); D. Glavan, S. P. Miao, T. Prokopec, R. P. Woodard, JHEP 08 195 (2023)

    work page 2022

  65. [65]

    Herring, S

    N. Herring, S. Cao, D. Boyanovsky, Phys. Rev. D 109, 105021 (2024); N. Herring, S. Cao, D. Boy- anovsky, Phys. Rev. D 111, 016028 (2025); N. Herring, D. Boyan ovsky, Phys. Rev. D 113, 043503 (2026)

    work page 2024

  66. [66]

    L.-Y. Chen, N. Goldenfeld and Y. Oono, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 13 11 (1994); Phys. Rev. E 54, 376 (1996); N. D. Goldenfeld, Lectures on Phase Transitions and the Renormalization Grou p (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1992)

    work page 1994

  67. [67]

    Birrell and P.C.W

    N.D. Birrell and P.C.W. Davies, J. Phys. A 13, 961 (1980); see also Ref.[37], Sect. 5.6

    work page 1980

  68. [68]

    Ya. B. Zeldovich, A.A. Starobinsky, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 61, 21 61 (1971) [Sov. Phys. JETP, 34, 1159 (1972)]; Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 26, 373 (1977) [Sov. Phys. JET P Lett, 26, 252 (1977)]

    work page 1971

  69. [69]

    L. H. Ford, arXiv:gr-qc/9707062

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv