pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.05295 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-06 · ✦ hep-th · gr-qc· hep-ph

Recognition: unknown

Ultraviolet completion of Starobinsky inflation

Ignatios Antoniadis , Chrysoula Markou , Dimitri V. Nanopoulos
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 17:22 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th gr-qchep-ph
keywords N=1 supergravityF(R) gravityStarobinsky inflationheterotic stringswampland distance conjectureinitial conditionseffective field theoryscalaron
0
0 comments X

The pith

N=1 supergravity embeds arbitrary F(R) gravity and deforms Starobinsky inflation to solve initial conditions within EFT below the swampland scale.

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

The paper constructs an N=1 supergravity action whose bosonic sector realizes an arbitrary function of the scalar curvature, known as F(R) gravity. It employs two chiral superfields: one houses the scalaron that drives Starobinsky inflation, while the second contains the goldstino of broken supersymmetry. The string dilaton gives the extra scalar a non-tachyonic mass, permitting it and the scalaron's pseudoscalar partner to be set to zero. This reduction yields a perturbative deformation of the Starobinsky model whose higher-order curvature terms resolve the initial-conditions problem while the dynamics stay inside the effective-field-theory regime, below the tower of states required by the swampland distance conjecture. A concrete four-dimensional heterotic string realization that also contains the Standard Model is exhibited.

Core claim

We construct an N=1 supergravity action whose bosonic part contains an arbitrary function of the scalar curvature, the so-called F(R) gravity. As in R+R² supergravity, it can be described in terms of two chiral superfields of no-scale supergravity: one contains the scalaron which plays the role of the Starobinsky inflaton and the other contains the goldstone fermion of spontaneously broken supersymmetry during the inflation plateau. Its (complex) scalar component acquires a non-tachyonic mass in the presence of the string dilaton and can be set to zero, together with the pseudoscalar partner of the scalaron, so that the scalar potential is reduced to the one of F(R) gravity. In a perceptive

What carries the argument

The two-chiral-superfield formulation of no-scale N=1 supergravity that embeds arbitrary F(R) gravity, with the string dilaton stabilizing the extra scalar so the dynamics reduce exactly to the bosonic F(R) potential.

If this is right

  • A small perturbative deformation of the Starobinsky potential arises naturally and solves the initial-conditions problem while remaining valid below the swampland tower scale.
  • The bosonic sector reduces exactly to F(R) gravity without introducing instabilities once the extra scalar and pseudoscalar are set to zero.
  • A four-dimensional heterotic string model containing the Standard Model supplies an explicit microscopic realization of the required supergravity structure.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same two-superfield embedding may be applied to other higher-curvature inflationary models to generate controlled deformations inside EFT.
  • Cosmological observables such as the tensor-to-scalar ratio could reveal the small corrections predicted by the R-expansion.
  • The construction indicates that swampland constraints on inflation can be satisfied by moduli stabilization in heterotic compactifications.

Load-bearing premise

The extra scalar from the second chiral superfield receives a non-tachyonic mass from the string dilaton, allowing it and the scalaron's pseudoscalar partner to be set exactly to zero without instabilities or violation of the EFT cutoff.

What would settle it

A explicit computation showing that the extra scalar develops a tachyonic mass for field values on the inflationary plateau, or that the resulting potential deviates from F(R) form outside the perturbative regime, would falsify the consistent reduction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.05295 by Chrysoula Markou, Dimitri V. Nanopoulos, Ignatios Antoniadis.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: , we plot V0 (TR(ϕ)) and compare it with the Starobinsky potential VStar(ϕ)/m2 (obtained for β = 0) given in (2.6). A small negative value of β rises the potential before ϕ reaches the critical value ϕc ≃ 10 at which the mass of the KK tower predicted by the Swampland distance conjecture becomes of order the inflation scale and violates unitarity [10] (see discussion in Section 2). 5 10 15 ϕ 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We construct an $N=1$ supergravity action whose bosonic part contains an arbitrary function of the scalar curvature, the so-called $F(R)$ gravity. As in $R+R^2$ supergravity, it can be described in terms of two chiral superfields of no-scale supergravity: one contains the scalaron which plays the role of the Starobinsky inflaton and the other contains the goldstone fermion of spontaneously broken supersymmetry during the inflation plateau. Its (complex) scalar component acquires a non-tachyonic mass in the presence of the string dilaton and can be set to zero, together with the pseudoscalar partner of the scalaron, so that the scalar potential is reduced to the one of $F(R)$ gravity. In a perturbative expansion in powers of $R$, one obtains a small deformation of the Starobinsky cosmological model that solves the problem of initial conditions within the validity of the effective field theory, below the scale of tower of states predicted by the swampland distance conjecture. We also show that a particular example of an underlying microscopic theory with such properties is provided by a four-dimensional heterotic string model containing the Standard Model of particle physics.

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 constructs an N=1 supergravity action whose bosonic sector realizes an arbitrary F(R) gravity using two no-scale chiral superfields: one containing the scalaron (Starobinsky inflaton) and the other the goldstino fermion of broken supersymmetry. The complex scalar of the second superfield acquires a non-tachyonic mass from the string dilaton and, together with the scalaron pseudoscalar, can be set to zero, reducing the potential exactly to F(R) form. A perturbative expansion in R yields a small deformation of Starobinsky inflation that solves initial-conditions issues within the EFT cutoff, below the swampland distance-conjecture tower scale. An explicit microscopic realization is given by a four-dimensional heterotic string model containing the Standard Model.

Significance. If the construction and stabilization hold, the work supplies a concrete UV completion of Starobinsky inflation in supergravity and heterotic strings, with the perturbative deformation addressing initial conditions while remaining inside the EFT regime. The explicit heterotic example with the SM and the no-scale structure are strengths that enhance the result's interest for inflationary model-building and swampland applications.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section on superfield construction and potential (around the discussion of the two chiral superfields)] The section deriving the supergravity action and potential reduction: the claim that setting the second superfield scalar and scalaron pseudoscalar to zero yields exactly the F(R) potential without instabilities requires an explicit expansion of the full scalar potential (including Kähler and superpotential contributions) to confirm the absence of residual cross terms or tachyonic directions after dilaton stabilization.
  2. [Section on cosmological implications and swampland constraints] The part on the perturbative expansion and initial conditions: the statement that the deformation solves the initial-conditions problem within the EFT below the swampland tower scale needs a quantitative estimate of the field range and the cutoff scale to verify that the solution remains valid throughout the inflationary trajectory.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and introduction] The abstract and introduction would benefit from a brief statement of the explicit form of the perturbative F(R) expansion used.
  2. [Section introducing the superfields] Notation for the no-scale Kähler potential and the goldstino superfield could be clarified with a short table comparing to standard Starobinsky supergravity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We are pleased that the referee finds the construction of interest for inflationary model-building and swampland applications. Below we address each major comment point by point and indicate the changes we will make to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section on superfield construction and potential (around the discussion of the two chiral superfields)] The section deriving the supergravity action and potential reduction: the claim that setting the second superfield scalar and scalaron pseudoscalar to zero yields exactly the F(R) potential without instabilities requires an explicit expansion of the full scalar potential (including Kähler and superpotential contributions) to confirm the absence of residual cross terms or tachyonic directions after dilaton stabilization.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that an explicit expansion of the scalar potential is necessary to rigorously confirm the reduction and stability. In the revised version of the manuscript, we will include a detailed derivation of the full scalar potential from the Kähler potential and superpotential of the two no-scale chiral superfields, incorporating the dilaton stabilization. This expansion will demonstrate that there are no residual cross terms and that the mass terms for the stabilized fields are positive, ensuring no tachyonic instabilities. The no-scale structure and the dilaton-induced mass for the second superfield scalar guarantee that setting these fields to zero reduces the potential exactly to the desired F(R) form without instabilities. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Section on cosmological implications and swampland constraints] The part on the perturbative expansion and initial conditions: the statement that the deformation solves the initial-conditions problem within the EFT below the swampland tower scale needs a quantitative estimate of the field range and the cutoff scale to verify that the solution remains valid throughout the inflationary trajectory.

    Authors: We thank the referee for pointing this out. To address this, we will add quantitative estimates in the revised manuscript. We will calculate the field range of the inflaton during the inflationary phase for the perturbatively deformed Starobinsky model and compare it explicitly to the EFT cutoff scale, which lies below the scale of the tower of states predicted by the swampland distance conjecture. This will confirm that the solution to the initial conditions problem remains within the validity of the effective field theory throughout the trajectory, with the small deformation in powers of R keeping all higher-order corrections under control. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper constructs an N=1 supergravity action with two no-scale chiral superfields whose bosonic potential reduces exactly to an arbitrary F(R) form after stabilizing the second superfield's scalar via the dilaton and setting the pseudoscalar to zero. This reduction follows directly from the supergravity Lagrangian and field equations without any fitted parameter being renamed as a prediction, self-definitional loop, or ansatz imported solely via self-citation. The perturbative expansion around Starobinsky and the claim of solving initial conditions within the EFT cutoff are derived consequences of the resulting potential, not inputs. The heterotic string realization is presented as an explicit microscopic example rather than a load-bearing justification. No step in the provided abstract or skeptic summary reduces the central result to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard N=1 supergravity assumptions, no-scale Kähler structure, spontaneous supersymmetry breaking during inflation, and the existence of a suitable heterotic string compactification; the arbitrary F(R) function is the primary input rather than a derived quantity.

free parameters (1)
  • coefficients in the perturbative expansion of F(R)
    Higher-order terms in the curvature expansion are introduced to produce the small deformation; their specific values are not fixed by the abstract.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption No-scale supergravity structure for the two chiral superfields
    Invoked to describe the model containing the scalaron and goldstone fermion.
  • domain assumption The string dilaton generates a non-tachyonic mass for the extra scalar
    Required to set the extra fields to zero while preserving the F(R) potential.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5513 in / 1494 out tokens · 26018 ms · 2026-05-08T17:22:23.334610+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Cosmological Inflation Cries Out for Supersymmetry,

    J. R. Ellis, D. V. Nanopoulos, K. A. Olive, and K. Tamvakis, “Cosmological Inflation Cries Out for Supersymmetry,”Phys. Lett. B118(1982) 335

    1982

  2. [2]

    PRIMORDIAL SUPERSYMMETRIC INFLATION,

    J. R. Ellis, D. V. Nanopoulos, K. A. Olive, and K. Tamvakis, “PRIMORDIAL SUPERSYMMETRIC INFLATION,”Nucl. Phys. B221(1983) 524–548

    1983

  3. [3]

    Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation

    A. A. Starobinsky , “A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity,” Phys. Lett. B91(1980) 99–102. [4]PlanckCollaboration, Y. Akramiet al., “Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation,” Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A10,arXiv:1807.06211 [astro-ph.CO]. [5]PlanckCollaboration, N. Aghanimet al., “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological pa...

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 1980

  4. [4]

    Tristramet al.(BICEP/Keck and Planck), Im- proved limits on the tensor-to-scalar ratio using BICEP and Planck data, Phys

    M. Tristramet al., “Improved limits on the tensor-to-scalar ratio using BICEP and Planck data,”Phys. Rev. D105(2022) no. 8, 083524,arXiv:2112.07961 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    Higher Derivative Supergravity is Equivalent to Standard Supergravity Coupled to Matter. 1.,

    S. Cecotti, “Higher Derivative Supergravity is Equivalent to Standard Supergravity Coupled to Matter. 1.,”Phys. Lett. B190(1987) 86–92

    1987

  6. [6]

    No-Scale Supergravity Realization of the Starobinsky Model of Inflation,

    J. Ellis, D. V. Nanopoulos, and K. A. Olive, “No-Scale Supergravity Realization of the Starobinsky Model of Inflation,”Phys. Rev. Lett.111(2013) 111301,arXiv:1305.1247 [hep-th]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 111, 129902 (2013)]

    work page arXiv 2013

  7. [7]

    On the Supersymmetric Completion ofR+R 2 Gravity and Cosmology,

    S. Ferrara, R. Kallosh, and A. Van Proeyen, “On the Supersymmetric Completion ofR+R 2 Gravity and Cosmology,”JHEP11(2013) 134,arXiv:1309.4052 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2013

  8. [8]

    R2-inflation derived from 4d strings, the role of the dilaton, and turning the Swampland into a mirage,

    I. Antoniadis, D. V. Nanopoulos, and K. A. Olive, “R2-inflation derived from 4d strings, the role of the dilaton, and turning the Swampland into a mirage,”JHEP06(2025) 155, arXiv:2410.16541 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    How accidental was inflation?,

    I. Antoniadis, J. Ellis, W. Ke, D. V. Nanopoulos, and K. A. Olive, “How accidental was inflation?,”JCAP08(2025) 090,arXiv:2504.12283 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Effects of R**3 and R box R terms on R**2 inflation,

    A. L. Berkin and K.-i. Maeda, “Effects of R**3 and R box R terms on R**2 inflation,”Phys. Lett. B245(1990) 348–354

    1990

  11. [11]

    Keeping the relation between the Starobinsky model and no-scale supergravity ACTive,

    I. D. Gialamas, T. Katsoulas, and K. Tamvakis, “Keeping the relation between the Starobinsky model and no-scale supergravity ACTive,”JCAP09(2025) 060, arXiv:2505.03608 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Toward a gravitational network: Bridging metric-affine gravity and no-scale supergravity,

    I. D. Gialamas, T. Katsoulas, and K. Tamvakis, “Toward a gravitational network: Bridging metric-affine gravity and no-scale supergravity,”Phys. Rev. D112(2025) no. 9, 9, arXiv:2506.02159 [hep-th]. 27

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Non-Linear Lagrangians and Cosmological Theory,

    H. A. Buchdahl, “Non-Linear Lagrangians and Cosmological Theory,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.150(1970) no. 1, 1–8

    1970

  14. [14]

    f(R) Theories Of Gravity

    T. P. Sotiriou and V. Faraoni, “f(R) Theories Of Gravity,”Rev. Mod. Phys.82(2010) 451–497,arXiv:0805.1726 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2010

  15. [15]

    f(R) theories

    A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, “f(R) theories,”Living Rev. Rel.13(2010) 3, arXiv:1002.4928 [gr-qc]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2010

  16. [16]

    The String Landscape and the Swampland

    C. Vafa, “The String landscape and the swampland,”arXiv:hep-th/0509212

    work page Pith review arXiv

  17. [17]

    On the Geometry of the String Landscape and the Swampland

    H. Ooguri and C. Vafa, “On the Geometry of the String Landscape and the Swampland,” Nucl. Phys. B766(2007) 21–33,arXiv:hep-th/0605264

    work page Pith review arXiv 2007

  18. [18]

    Agrawal, G

    P. Agrawal, G. Obied, P. J. Steinhardt, and C. Vafa, “On the Cosmological Implications of the String Swampland,”Phys. Lett. B784(2018) 271–276,arXiv:1806.09718 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2018

  19. [19]

    Swampland distance conjecture, inflation andα-attractors,

    M. Scalisi and I. Valenzuela, “Swampland distance conjecture, inflation andα-attractors,” JHEP08(2019) 160,arXiv:1812.07558 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2019

  20. [20]

    Starobinsky inflation in the swampland,

    D. Lüst, J. Masias, B. Muntz, and M. Scalisi, “Starobinsky inflation in the swampland,” JHEP07(2024) 186,arXiv:2312.13210 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Emergent strings from infinite distance limits,

    S.-J. Lee, W. Lerche, and T. Weigand, “Emergent strings from infinite distance limits,” JHEP02(2022) 190,arXiv:1910.01135 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    Forbidden Mass Range for Spin-2 Field Theory in De Sitter Space-time,

    A. Higuchi, “Forbidden Mass Range for Spin-2 Field Theory in De Sitter Space-time,”Nucl. Phys. B282(1987) 397–436

    1987

  23. [23]

    Cosmology of the string derived flipped SU(5),

    I. Antoniadis, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. Rizos, “Cosmology of the string derived flipped SU(5),”JCAP03(2021) 017,arXiv:2011.09396 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    No Scale Supergravity Models with a Planck Mass Gravitino,

    J. R. Ellis, C. Kounnas, and D. V. Nanopoulos, “No Scale Supergravity Models with a Planck Mass Gravitino,”Phys. Lett. B143(1984) 410–414

    1984

  25. [25]

    Starobinsky-like Inflationary Models as Avatars of No-Scale Supergravity,

    J. Ellis, D. V. Nanopoulos, and K. A. Olive, “Starobinsky-like Inflationary Models as Avatars of No-Scale Supergravity,”JCAP10(2013) 009,arXiv:1307.3537 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2013

  26. [26]

    Superconformal generalizations of the Starobinsky model,

    R. Kallosh and A. Linde, “Superconformal generalizations of the Starobinsky model,” JCAP06(2013) 028,arXiv:1306.3214 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2013

  27. [27]

    Non-minimal Inflationary Attractors,

    R. Kallosh and A. Linde, “Non-minimal Inflationary Attractors,”JCAP10(2013) 033, arXiv:1307.7938 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2013

  28. [28]

    The Volkov–Akulov–Starobinsky supergravity,

    I. Antoniadis, E. Dudas, S. Ferrara, and A. Sagnotti, “The Volkov–Akulov–Starobinsky supergravity,”Phys. Lett. B733(2014) 32–35,arXiv:1403.3269 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2014

  29. [29]

    The coupling of Non-linear Supersymmetry to Supergravity,

    I. Antoniadis and C. Markou, “The coupling of Non-linear Supersymmetry to Supergravity,”Eur . Phys. J. C75(2015) no. 12, 582,arXiv:1508.06767 [hep-th]. 28

    work page arXiv 2015

  30. [30]

    Renormalization of Higher Derivative Quantum Gravity,

    K. S. Stelle, “Renormalization of Higher Derivative Quantum Gravity,”Phys. Rev. D16 (1977) 953–969

    1977

  31. [31]

    Classical Gravity with Higher Derivatives,

    K. S. Stelle, “Classical Gravity with Higher Derivatives,”Gen. Rel. Grav.9(1978) 353–371

    1978

  32. [32]

    Quantizing Fourth Order Gravity Theories. 1. The Functional Integral,

    N. H. Barth and S. M. Christensen, “Quantizing Fourth Order Gravity Theories. 1. The Functional Integral,”Phys. Rev. D28(1983) 1876

    1983

  33. [33]

    The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Power Spectra, Likelihoods and $\Lambda$CDM Parameters

    B. Whitt, “Fourth Order Gravity as General Relativity Plus Matter,”Phys. Lett. B145 (1984) 176–178. [36]Atacama Cosmology TelescopeCollaboration, T. Louiset al., “The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 power spectra, likelihoods andΛCDM parameters,”JCAP11(2025) 062, arXiv:2503.14452 [astro-ph.CO]. [37]DESICollaboration, A. G. Adameet al., “DESI 2024 VI: cos...

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 1984

  34. [34]

    Superstring-inspired supergravity as the universal source of inflation and quintessence,

    S. J. Gates, Jr. and S. V. Ketov, “Superstring-inspired supergravity as the universal source of inflation and quintessence,”Phys. Lett. B674(2009) 59–63,arXiv:0901.2467 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2009

  35. [35]

    Scalar potential in F(R) supergravity,

    S. V. Ketov, “Scalar potential in F(R) supergravity,”Class. Quant. Grav.26(2009) 135006, arXiv:0903.0251 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2009

  36. [36]

    Embedding(R+R 2)-Inflation into Supergravity,

    S. V. Ketov and A. A. Starobinsky , “Embedding(R+R 2)-Inflation into Supergravity,”Phys. Rev. D83(2011) 063512,arXiv:1011.0240 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2011

  37. [37]

    Old-minimal supergravity models of inflation,

    S. V. Ketov and T. Terada, “Old-minimal supergravity models of inflation,”JHEP12 (2013) 040,arXiv:1309.7494 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2013

  38. [38]

    Naturally Vanishing Cosmological Constant in N=1 Supergravity,

    E. Cremmer, S. Ferrara, C. Kounnas, and D. V. Nanopoulos, “Naturally Vanishing Cosmological Constant in N=1 Supergravity,”Phys. Lett. B133(1983) 61

    1983

  39. [39]

    The Road to No Scale Supergravity,

    A. B. Lahanas and D. V. Nanopoulos, “The Road to No Scale Supergravity,”Phys. Rept. 145(1987) 1

    1987

  40. [40]

    Four-Dimensional Superstrings,

    I. Antoniadis, C. P. Bachas, and C. Kounnas, “Four-Dimensional Superstrings,”Nucl. Phys. B289(1987) 87

    1987

  41. [41]

    The Flipped SU(5) x U(1) String Model Revamped,

    I. Antoniadis, J. R. Ellis, J. S. Hagelin, and D. V. Nanopoulos, “The Flipped SU(5) x U(1) String Model Revamped,”Phys. Lett. B231(1989) 65–74

    1989

  42. [42]

    Particle physics and cosmology of the string derived no-scale flipped SU(5),

    I. Antoniadis, D. V. Nanopoulos, and J. Rizos, “Particle physics and cosmology of the string derived no-scale flipped SU(5),”Eur . Phys. J. C82(2022) no. 4, 377, arXiv:2112.01211 [hep-th]. 29

    work page arXiv 2022

  43. [43]

    Avoiding Dark Energy with 1/R Modifications of Gravity

    R. P. Woodard, “Avoiding dark energy with 1/r modifications of gravity,”Lect. Notes Phys. 720(2007) 403–433,arXiv:astro-ph/0601672

    work page Pith review arXiv 2007

  44. [44]

    Limit to general relativity in f(R) theories of gravity,

    G. J. Olmo, “Limit to general relativity in f(R) theories of gravity,”Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 023511,arXiv:gr-qc/0612047

    work page arXiv 2007

  45. [45]

    Can modified gravity explain accelerated cosmic expansion?

    A. D. Dolgov and M. Kawasaki, “Can modified gravity explain accelerated cosmic expansion?,”Phys. Lett. B573(2003) 1–4,arXiv:astro-ph/0307285

    work page Pith review arXiv 2003

  46. [46]

    Disappearing cosmological constant inf(R)gravity,

    A. A. Starobinsky , “Disappearing cosmological constant in f(R) gravity,”JETP Lett.86 (2007) 157–163,arXiv:0706.2041 [astro-ph]

    work page arXiv 2007

  47. [47]

    D. Z. Freedman and A. Van Proeyen,Supergravity. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 5, 2012

    2012

  48. [48]

    No Scale Supersymmetric Guts,

    J. R. Ellis, C. Kounnas, and D. V. Nanopoulos, “No Scale Supersymmetric Guts,”Nucl. Phys. B247(1984) 373–395

    1984

  49. [49]

    On the supersymmetrization of inflation in f(R) gravity,

    S. V. Ketov, “On the supersymmetrization of inflation in f(R) gravity,”PTEP2013(2013) 123B04,arXiv:1309.0293 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2013

  50. [50]

    Superkahler Geometry in Supergravity and Superstrings,

    S. Cecotti, S. Ferrara, L. Girardello, and M. Porrati, “Superkahler Geometry in Supergravity and Superstrings,”Phys. Lett. B185(1987) 345–350

    1987

  51. [51]

    Domain-wall/cosmology correspondence in adS/dS supergravity,

    K. Skenderis, P. K. Townsend, and A. Van Proeyen, “Domain-wall/cosmology correspondence in adS/dS supergravity,”JHEP08(2007) 036,arXiv:0704.3918 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2007

  52. [52]

    Holography for inflation using conformal perturbation theory,

    A. Bzowski, P. McFadden, and K. Skenderis, “Holography for inflation using conformal perturbation theory,”JHEP04(2013) 047,arXiv:1211.4550 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2013

  53. [53]

    Wess and J

    J. Wess and J. Bagger,Supersymmetry and supergravity. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 1992

    1992

  54. [54]

    Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking and Higgs Effect in Supergravity Without Cosmological Constant,

    E. Cremmer, B. Julia, J. Scherk, S. Ferrara, L. Girardello, and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking and Higgs Effect in Supergravity Without Cosmological Constant,”Nucl. Phys. B147(1979) 105

    1979

  55. [55]

    Conformal and Poincare Tensor Calculi inN= 1Supergravity,

    T. Kugo and S. Uehara, “Conformal and Poincare Tensor Calculi inN= 1Supergravity,” Nucl. Phys. B226(1983) 49–92

    1983

  56. [56]

    N=1 Conformal Superspace in Four Dimensions,

    D. Butter, “N=1 Conformal Superspace in Four Dimensions,”Annals Phys.325(2010) 1026–1080,arXiv:0906.4399 [hep-th]. 30

    work page arXiv 2010