Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 86 references

A torsion-driven inflaton decays through chiral-anomaly and top-Yukawa channels, so even minimal couplings to Standard Model fermions reheat the universe to around 10^5–10^7 GeV.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 03:25 UTC pith:YHDFKMZQ

load-bearing objection Minimal coupling reheats torsion inflation through anomaly and Yukawa-assisted channels—the calculation is careful and likely right, but the quoted T_RH/n_s/GW numbers are conditional on a perturbative-decay assumption that is never checked. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.29618 v1 pith:YHDFKMZQ submitted 2026-07-31 hep-ph astro-ph.COgr-qc

Inflation and Reheating by Dynamical Torsion

Xiaolin Ma , Kamil Mudrunka , Kazunori Nakayama This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.COgr-qc
keywords torsion inflationreheatingpseudo-scalaronaxial currentchiral anomalygravitational wavesscalar spectral indexEinstein-Cartan gravity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Torsion-driven inflation naturally couples the inflaton to the axial current of Standard Model fermions, but that derivative coupling makes the immediate decay channel—two-body decay into a fermion pair—vanish for massless fermions. The paper shows that the story does not end there: rewriting the coupling through the divergence of the chiral current produces an anomaly-induced two-body decay into gauge bosons and a top-Yukawa-induced three-body decay into a fermion pair plus a Higgs boson. These channels are suppressed only mildly relative to a canonical decay rate, giving a total width Γtot = 4.49×10⁻⁴ mφ³/feff². The resulting reheating temperature is typically 10^5–10^7 GeV, which the paper presents as a natural lower bound. This makes torsion inflation observationally distinct from conventional curvature-square inflation through the scalar spectral index and the primordial gravitational-wave spectrum.

Core claim

Even with only the minimal torsion-fermion coupling, the inflaton decays, and the paper computes exactly how. The derivative interaction (∂µφ/feff)ψ̄γµγ5ψ is transformed, via integration by parts plus the chiral anomaly, into local operators: a contact Yukawa term dominated by the top quark and anomalous couplings to gluons, SU(2) bosons, and hypercharge. The resulting partial widths are ΓffH = |yt|²/(32π³) mφ³/feff² and ΓVV = (9αs²/(2π³)+27α2²/(16π³)+25α1²/(16π³)) mφ³/feff², summing to Γtot = 4.49×10⁻⁴ mφ³/feff². For benchmark parameters that reproduce the observed curvature perturbation amplitude, the reheating temperature is predicted to be around 10^5–10^7 GeV, with branching fractions o

What carries the argument

The central object is the derivatively coupled torsion scalar φ, often called the pseudo-scalaron, whose minimal interaction with matter is L = (∂µφ/feff) ψ̄γµγ5ψ. The argument rides on the current-divergence identity: after integration by parts, this coupling becomes −φ/feff times the divergence of the fermion axial current, and that divergence has two Standard Model sources—Yukawa operators (with the top quark dominating) and the chiral anomaly, with coefficients C3=6, C2=6, C1=10. This identity turns an apparently inert derivative coupling into explicit local decay vertices, and the paper evaluates the two- and three-body phase-space integrals assuming massless final states except for the

Load-bearing premise

The central result assumes the inflaton interacts with Standard Model fermions only through the minimal derivative coupling, and that reheating proceeds perturbatively; a non-minimal torsion–Higgs coupling or efficient preheating would change the decay width and every derived prediction.

What would settle it

Measure the high-frequency knee in the primordial gravitational-wave spectrum; if the inferred reheating temperature lies outside 10^4–10^8 GeV for parameters reproducing the observed density perturbation, the minimal-coupling prediction is ruled out.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Successful reheating becomes generic in torsion-driven inflation: no non-minimal torsion–Higgs coupling and no right-handed neutrino tuned near the inflaton mass are required.
  • The reheating temperature is bounded below near 10^5 GeV and typically sits in 10^5–10^7 GeV once the observed density perturbation is imposed.
  • Because the number of e-folds—and hence n_s and r—depends on Trh, the model predicts specific CMB observables ranging from n_s ≃ 0.971 (for β=20) to n_s ≃ 0.960 (for β=1000), separating it from conventional curvature-square inflation.
  • Gravitational waves imprinted during the inflaton-dominated era have a spectral knee at f_RH ≃ 0.26 Hz (Trh/10^7 GeV), which future space-based interferometers could in principle measure directly.
  • The computed branching ratios provide the input needed to evaluate right-handed neutrino production and nonthermal leptogenesis in these models.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the same mechanism is applied to axion-like particles with a universal derivative coupling to fermions—an application the paper gestures toward—the anomaly-plus-Yukawa decays provide a model-independent lower bound on their decay width even when the direct fermion channel is closed.
  • The perturbative decay assumption is the main caveat left open: if the derivative coupling also drives efficient non-perturbative preheating, Trh could rise above the paper's range, shifting n_s and the gravitational-wave amplitude in a calculable direction.
  • A precise measurement of n_s would select a specific β and therefore a specific reheating temperature, offering an independent cross-check of the gravitational-wave prediction without waiting for direct GW detection.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies inflation driven by a dynamical torsion vector in metric-affine and Einstein-Cartan gravity. After integrating out the non-dynamical distortion fields (Sec. 3), the theory reduces to Einstein gravity plus a canonical scalar whose potential has a Starobinsky-like plateau for large β. The paper's central new contribution is the reheating calculation (Sec. 4): with only the minimal derivative coupling of the torsion to the SM axial/chiral current, Eq. (4.4), the two-body decay into massless fermions vanishes, but the chiral-current divergence receives a top-Yukawa piece and SM gauge anomalies. This yields a three-body decay into a fermion pair plus a Higgs boson and anomaly-induced two-body decays into gauge boson pairs. The total width is Γ_tot = 4.49×10⁻⁴ m_φ³/f_eff², leading to T_RH ≃ 10⁵–10⁷ GeV for benchmark parameters (Table 1). The resulting n_s and the low-frequency turnover of the gravitational-wave spectrum are used to distinguish this scenario from Starobinsky inflation (Sec. 5). Appendices A.2–A.5 contain the detailed calculations, including a direct basis check of the three-body width.

Significance. If the central calculation is correct, the paper removes the need for non-minimal torsion–Higgs couplings or right-handed neutrinos for successful reheating, and it turns the minimal torsion–SM coupling into a predictive reheating scenario with a definite T_RH, n_s, and DECIGO-relevant gravitational-wave signal. The paper has genuine technical strengths: the anomaly coefficients C₁=10, C₂=6, C₃=6 are derived from SM quantum numbers, the three-body width is checked in the original derivative basis (A.5), and the finite-mass two-body calculation (A.4) correctly interpolates to known axion limits. These checks give confidence that the perturbative decay amplitudes, apart from possible normalization subtleties, are internally consistent.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 4.2, Eqs. (4.13)–(4.16)] The quantitative predictions for T_RH, n_s in Eq. (5.6), and the gravitational-wave turnover f_RH in Eq. (5.10) all assume purely perturbative, zero-temperature decay of a free inflaton. For a homogeneous oscillating φ, the derivative coupling (4.4) corresponds to a time-dependent chiral rotation and, after integrating by parts, to a time-dependent anomaly operator and oscillating Yukawa phases. This can generate fermions and gauge fields non-perturbatively (preheating/parametric resonance). The paper gives no estimate of the corresponding Floquet exponents or production rate. Since Γ_tot/m_φ is tiny for the benchmarks (for β=20 one obtains Γ_tot ≈ 10⁻⁴ GeV for m_φ ≈ 4×10¹³ GeV), even a comparatively modest non-perturbative efficiency would change T_RH substantially. The authors should either estimate non-perturbative production and show it is negligible, or present T_RH-dependent predic
  2. [Abstract and Sec. 6, with Eq. (4.16)] The claim that there is a 'natural lower bound' T_RH ≳ 10⁵ GeV is not actually derived in the text. Along the CMB-normalized curve in Fig. 3, β is a free parameter and T_RH decreases with increasing β (compare β=20 and β=1000 in Table 1). The paper does not state the observational or consistency criterion (e.g., a limit on n_s or on N*) that terminates this one-parameter family and converts it into a lower bound, nor does it give the boundary value of β. Without this, the abstract's 'lower bound' statement is stronger than what the presented analysis demonstrates.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 4.1, text after Eq. (4.6)] Typo: 'multiplied by a a factor 2' should read 'a factor 2'.
  2. [Table 1] The entry '103' in the β column appears to mean 10³; please use consistent notation to avoid confusion with the numeral 103.
  3. [Fig. 3] The axis label 'γ (10¹²)' in the right panel is ambiguous; it should indicate whether γ is in units of 10¹² or the axis tick labels are scaled.
  4. [Sec. 6] The statement that the three-body decay into fermion pair plus graviton 'vanishes' is asserted without derivation or reference. If this is used in the discussion of gravitational-wave production, please provide the calculation or a citation.
  5. [Appendix A.5] The comment that SU(2)_L invariance requires the same torsion coupling to b_L as to t_L is terse; it would be clearer to state that the doublet kinetic term forces a common coupling for both weak components.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: decay rates, T_RH, n_s, and GW predictions are derived from the minimal torsion-SM coupling without fitting or renaming.

full rationale

The central quantitative chain is: minimal derivative coupling (4.4) -> current-divergence identity (4.8) with anomaly coefficients C1, C2, C3 computed from SM quantum numbers (A.10-A.11) -> total width (4.13) with A_tot = 4.49e-4 -> T_RH (4.16). The parameters m_phi and f_eff are explicit functions of the model parameters (3.12), (4.5), and the only fitted quantity, q = beta^2/gamma, is fixed by the CMB amplitude A_s and enters through the inflaton mass scale; T_RH, n_s, r, and f_RH are genuine outputs. The iterative use of N* to fix q (footnote 4) is a standard self-consistency condition, not a circular definition. The self-citations, e.g. [23] for the torsion decomposition and [49]-[54] for gravitational-wave transfer functions, are algebraic formulas/framework results with external standing; they do not carry the argument's load-bearing conclusion. The perturbative-decay assumption and possible non-perturbative preheating are physical assumptions rather than input-output equivalences, so they do not make the derivation circular.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on an EFT reduction from prior torsion-inflation literature, the minimal matter coupling, and standard QFT anomaly calculations. The only fitted model parameter is the overall amplitude q set by A_s; β remains free. No new particles or entities are introduced beyond the existing torsion pseudo-scalaron.

free parameters (2)
  • q = β²/γ = ~1e-10 (fixed by A_s = 2.1×10⁻⁹)
    The curvature-perturbation amplitude normalization fixes the overall scale of the inflation potential; this parameter sets the inflaton mass m_ϕ, which enters the decay width and reheating temperature.
  • β = benchmarks 20, 30, 1000; otherwise free
    Controls the plateau shape of the potential and the effective coupling f_eff; the paper leaves it free within the model and presents predictions as a function of β.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The metric-affine/Einstein-Cartan action (3.1) reduces to a single canonical scalar field with potential (3.11), with all non-dynamical distortion components integrated out (Sec. 3.1–3.2).
    This reduction, taken from Refs. [12–21], defines the inflaton mass and couplings; it is not re-derived from a UV-complete theory.
  • domain assumption The torsion-inflaton couples to SM fermions through the minimal axial derivative interaction ∂_μϕ/f_eff ψ̄γ^μγ_5ψ (Eq. 4.4) with coefficient (4.5), and no unsuppressed non-minimal couplings (e.g. to the Higgs) are present.
    The paper explicitly excludes the non-minimal torsion-Higgs coupling (4.7) to isolate the minimal scenario; the lower-bound claim depends on this minimal-coupling assumption.
  • standard math Standard QFT results for the axial-vector Ward identity and the chiral anomaly; SM anomaly coefficients C₁=10, C₂=6, C₃=6 from SM quantum numbers; SM fermions treated as massless at the reheating scale.
    The anomaly computation and the massless limit are standard and valid for m_ϕ ~ 10^13 GeV; they form the basis of the decay-rate calculation in Sec. 4 and Appendix A.
  • domain assumption The inflaton condensate decays perturbatively and thermalizes instantaneously into a SM radiation bath with g_* = 106.75 (Eq. 4.16).
    Standard perturbative-reheating estimate; possible preheating or non-perturbative effects are not treated and could alter the reheating dynamics.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-daily-deepseek · 22204 in / 25534 out tokens · 260756 ms · 2026-08-03T03:25:32.296041+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

In gravity theories with torsion, inflation can be driven by the dynamical torsion. Since it naturally has a derivative coupling to the axial current consisting of Standard Model particles, the reheating dynamics should be much different from conventional inflation models like Starobinsky inflation. We calculate the inflaton decay rate in detail and find that, although the 2 body decay into the fermion pair is vanishing in the massless fermion limit, the anomaly-induced 2 body decay into the gauge bosons and 3 body decay involving the Higgs boson are non-vanishing and they give sizable contributions to the total decay width of the inflaton. This gives a natural lower bound on the reheating temperature in the inflation model with dynamical torsion.

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

86 extracted references · 66 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Guth,The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems,Phys

    A.H. Guth,The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems,Phys. Rev. D23(1981) 347

    1981

  2. [2]

    Sato,First-order phase transition of a vacuum and the expansion of the Universe, Mon

    K. Sato,First-order phase transition of a vacuum and the expansion of the Universe, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.195(1981) 467

    1981

  3. [3]

    Kazanas,Dynamics of the Universe and Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking, Astrophys

    D. Kazanas,Dynamics of the Universe and Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking, Astrophys. J. Lett.241(1980) L59

    1980

  4. [4]

    Linde,A New Inflationary Universe Scenario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole Problems,Phys

    A.D. Linde,A New Inflationary Universe Scenario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole Problems,Phys. Lett. B108(1982) 389

    1982

  5. [5]

    Albrecht and P.J

    A. Albrecht and P.J. Steinhardt,Cosmology for Grand Unified Theories with Radiatively Induced Symmetry Breaking,Phys. Rev. Lett.48(1982) 1220

    1982

  6. [6]

    Starobinsky,A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity,Phys

    A.A. Starobinsky,A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity,Phys. Lett. B91(1980) 99

    1980

  7. [7]

    Hehl, J.D

    F.W. Hehl, J.D. McCrea, E.W. Mielke and Y. Ne’eman,Metric affine gauge theory of gravity: Field equations, Noether identities, world spinors, and breaking of dilation invariance,Phys. Rept.258(1995) 1 [gr-qc/9402012]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  8. [8]

    Iosifidis,Metric-Affine Gravity and Cosmology/Aspects of Torsion and non-Metricity in Gravity Theories, Ph.D

    D. Iosifidis,Metric-Affine Gravity and Cosmology/Aspects of Torsion and non-Metricity in Gravity Theories, Ph.D. thesis, 2019.1902.09643

    arXiv 2019

  9. [9]

    Baldazzi, O

    A. Baldazzi, O. Melichev and R. Percacci,Metric-Affine Gravity as an effective field theory,Annals Phys.438(2022) 168757 [2112.10193]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  10. [10]

    F.W. Hehl, P. Von Der Heyde, G.D. Kerlick and J.M. Nester,General Relativity with Spin and Torsion: Foundations and Prospects,Rev. Mod. Phys.48(1976) 393

    1976

  11. [11]

    Shapiro,Physical aspects of the space-time torsion,Phys

    I.L. Shapiro,Physical aspects of the space-time torsion,Phys. Rept.357(2002) 113 [hep-th/0103093]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  12. [12]

    Aoki and S

    K. Aoki and S. Mukohyama,Consistent inflationary cosmology from quadratic gravity with dynamical torsion,JCAP06(2020) 004 [2003.00664]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  13. [13]

    Pradisi and A

    G. Pradisi and A. Salvio,(In)equivalence of metric-affine and metric effective field theories,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 840 [2206.15041]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  14. [14]

    Salvio,Inflating and reheating the Universe with an independent affine connection,Phys

    A. Salvio,Inflating and reheating the Universe with an independent affine connection,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 103510 [2207.08830]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  15. [15]

    Gialamas and K

    I.D. Gialamas and K. Tamvakis,Inflation in metric-affine quadratic gravity,JCAP 03(2023) 042 [2212.09896]. – 27 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    Di Marco, E

    A. Di Marco, E. Orazi and G. Pradisi,Einstein–Cartan pseudoscalaron inflation, Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) 146 [2309.11345]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  17. [17]

    M. He, M. Hong and K. Mukaida,Starobinsky inflation and beyond in Einstein-Cartan gravity,JCAP05(2024) 107 [2402.05358]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    M. He, M. Hong and K. Mukaida,Increase of ns in regularized pole inflation & Einstein-Cartan gravity,JCAP09(2025) 080 [2504.16069]

    arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    Katsoulas and K

    T. Katsoulas and K. Tamvakis,Inflationary assessment of F(R,R˜) Einstein-Cartan models,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 124010 [2512.02847]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  20. [20]

    Di Benedetto, A

    C. Di Benedetto, A. Di Marco, E. Orazi and G. Pradisi,Einstein-Cartan pseudoscalaron inflation, reheating and nonthermal leptogenesis,2605.09571

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    Del Grosso, A

    L. Del Grosso, A. Urbano and M. Ziccolella,ACT stands for Awkward Cosmology Theories,2607.09808

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  22. [22]

    Rigouzzo and S

    C. Rigouzzo and S. Zell,Coupling metric-affine gravity to the standard model and dark matter fermions,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 124067 [2306.13134]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Nakayama,Naturally Light Distortion,2603.10915

    K. Nakayama,Naturally Light Distortion,2603.10915

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  24. [24]

    Sandberg,Are torsion theories of gravitation equivalent to metric theories?, Phys

    V.D. Sandberg,Are torsion theories of gravitation equivalent to metric theories?, Phys. Rev. D12(1975) 3013

    1975

  25. [25]

    Hehl and G.D

    F.W. Hehl and G.D. Kerlick,Metric-affine variational principles in general relativity. I. Riemannian space-time,Gen. Rel. Grav.9(1978) 691

    1978

  26. [26]

    Hojman, C

    R. Hojman, C. Mukku and W.A. Sayed,PARITY VIOLATION IN METRIC TORSION THEORIES OF GRA VITATION,Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 1915

    1980

  27. [27]

    Nelson,Gravity With Propagating Pseudoscalar Torsion,Phys

    P.C. Nelson,Gravity With Propagating Pseudoscalar Torsion,Phys. Lett. A79 (1980) 285

    1980

  28. [28]

    Holst,Barbero’s Hamiltonian derived from a generalized Hilbert-Palatini action, Phys

    S. Holst,Barbero’s Hamiltonian derived from a generalized Hilbert-Palatini action, Phys. Rev. D53(1996) 5966 [gr-qc/9511026]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  29. [29]

    Barbero G.,Real Ashtekar variables for Lorentzian signature space times,Phys

    J.F. Barbero G.,Real Ashtekar variables for Lorentzian signature space times,Phys. Rev. D51(1995) 5507 [gr-qc/9410014]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  30. [30]

    Immirzi,Real and complex connections for canonical gravity,Class

    G. Immirzi,Real and complex connections for canonical gravity,Class. Quant. Grav. 14(1997) L177 [gr-qc/9612030]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  31. [31]

    Sotiriou and S

    T.P. Sotiriou and S. Liberati,Metric-affine f(R) theories of gravity,Annals Phys. 322(2007) 935 [gr-qc/0604006]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  32. [32]

    Sotiriou and V

    T.P. Sotiriou and V. Faraoni,f(R) Theories Of Gravity,Rev. Mod. Phys.82(2010) 451 [0805.1726]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  33. [33]

    Olmo,Palatini Approach to Modified Gravity: f(R) Theories and Beyond,Int

    G.J. Olmo,Palatini Approach to Modified Gravity: f(R) Theories and Beyond,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D20(2011) 413 [1101.3864]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  34. [34]

    Shimada, K

    K. Shimada, K. Aoki and K.-i. Maeda,Metric-affine Gravity and Inflation,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 104020 [1812.03420]. – 28 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  35. [35]

    M. Endo, M. Kawasaki, F. Takahashi and T.T. Yanagida,Inflaton decay through supergravity effects,Phys. Lett. B642(2006) 518 [hep-ph/0607170]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  36. [36]

    M. Endo, F. Takahashi and T.T. Yanagida,Anomaly-induced inflaton decay and gravitino-overproduction problem,Phys. Lett. B658(2008) 236 [hep-ph/0701042]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  37. [37]

    M. Endo, F. Takahashi and T.T. Yanagida,Inflaton Decay in Supergravity,Phys. Rev. D76(2007) 083509 [0706.0986]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  38. [38]

    Buttazzo, G

    D. Buttazzo, G. Degrassi, P.P. Giardino, G.F. Giudice, F. Sala, A. Salvio et al., Investigating the near-criticality of the Higgs boson,JHEP12(2013) 089 [1307.3536]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  39. [39]

    Mihaila, J

    L.N. Mihaila, J. Salomon and M. Steinhauser,Gauge Coupling Beta Functions in the Standard Model to Three Loops,Phys. Rev. Lett.108(2012) 151602 [1201.5868]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  40. [40]

    Vilenkin,Classical and Quantum Cosmology of the Starobinsky Inflationary Model,Phys

    A. Vilenkin,Classical and Quantum Cosmology of the Starobinsky Inflationary Model,Phys. Rev. D32(1985) 2511

    1985

  41. [41]

    Gorbunov and A.G

    D.S. Gorbunov and A.G. Panin,Scalaron the mighty: producing dark matter and baryon asymmetry at reheating,Phys. Lett. B700(2011) 157 [1009.2448]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  42. [42]

    Q. Li, T. Moroi, K. Nakayama and W. Yin,Hidden dark matter from Starobinsky inflation,JHEP09(2021) 179 [2105.13358]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  43. [43]

    Liddle and D.H

    A.R. Liddle and D.H. Lyth,Cosmological inflation and large scale structure(2000), 10.1017/CBO9781139175180

    doi:10.1017/cbo9781139175180 2000

  44. [44]

    Baumann,Inflation, inTheoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: Physics of the Large and the Small, pp

    D. Baumann,Inflation, inTheoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: Physics of the Large and the Small, pp. 523–686, 2011, DOI [0907.5424]. [45]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6 [1807.06209]. [46]Atacama Cosmology Telescopecollaboration,The Atacama Cosmology Telesco...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  45. [47]

    N. Seto, S. Kawamura and T. Nakamura,Possibility of direct measurement of the acceleration of the universe using 0.1-Hz band laser interferometer gravitational wave antenna in space,Phys. Rev. Lett.87(2001) 221103 [astro-ph/0108011]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  46. [48]

    Kawamura et al.,Current status of space gravitational wave antenna DECIGO and B-DECIGO,PTEP2021(2021) 05A105 [2006.13545]

    S. Kawamura et al.,Current status of space gravitational wave antenna DECIGO and B-DECIGO,PTEP2021(2021) 05A105 [2006.13545]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  47. [49]

    Nakayama, S

    K. Nakayama, S. Saito, Y. Suwa and J. Yokoyama,Space laser interferometers can determine the thermal history of the early Universe,Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 124001 [0802.2452]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  48. [50]

    Nakayama, S

    K. Nakayama, S. Saito, Y. Suwa and J. Yokoyama,Probing reheating temperature of the universe with gravitational wave background,JCAP06(2008) 020 [0804.1827]. – 29 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  49. [51]

    Kuroyanagi, T

    S. Kuroyanagi, T. Chiba and N. Sugiyama,Precision calculations of the gravitational wave background spectrum from inflation,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 103501 [0804.3249]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  50. [52]

    Kuroyanagi, K

    S. Kuroyanagi, K. Nakayama and S. Saito,Prospects for determination of thermal history after inflation with future gravitational wave detectors,Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 123513 [1110.4169]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  51. [53]

    Jinno, T

    R. Jinno, T. Moroi and T. Takahashi,Studying Inflation with Future Space-Based Gravitational Wave Detectors,JCAP12(2014) 006 [1406.1666]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  52. [54]

    Kuroyanagi, K

    S. Kuroyanagi, K. Nakayama and J. Yokoyama,Prospects of determination of reheating temperature after inflation by DECIGO,PTEP2015(2015) 013E02 [1410.6618]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  53. [55]

    Fukugita and T

    M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida,Baryogenesis Without Grand Unification,Phys. Lett. B174(1986) 45

    1986

  54. [56]

    Asaka, K

    T. Asaka, K. Hamaguchi, M. Kawasaki and T. Yanagida,Leptogenesis in inflaton decay,Phys. Lett. B464(1999) 12 [hep-ph/9906366]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  55. [57]

    Asaka, K

    T. Asaka, K. Hamaguchi, M. Kawasaki and T. Yanagida,Leptogenesis in inflationary universe,Phys. Rev. D61(2000) 083512 [hep-ph/9907559]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  56. [58]

    Nakayama and Y

    K. Nakayama and Y. Tang,Stochastic Gravitational Waves from Particle Origin, Phys. Lett. B788(2019) 341 [1810.04975]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  57. [59]

    Barman, N

    B. Barman, N. Bernal, Y. Xu and ´O. Zapata,Gravitational wave from graviton Bremsstrahlung during reheating,JCAP05(2023) 019 [2301.11345]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  58. [60]

    Barman, N

    B. Barman, N. Bernal, Y. Xu and ´O. Zapata,Bremsstrahlung-induced gravitational waves in monomial potentials during reheating,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 083524 [2305.16388]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  59. [61]

    W. Hu, K. Nakayama, V. Takhistov and Y. Tang,Gravitational wave probe of Planck-scale physics after inflation,Phys. Lett. B856(2024) 138958 [2403.13882]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  60. [62]

    W.-Y. Hu, K. Nakayama, V. Takhistov and Y. Tang,Dual gravitational wave signatures of instant preheating,JCAP01(2025) 029 [2409.06483]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  61. [63]

    Y. Ema, R. Jinno, K. Mukaida and K. Nakayama,Gravitational Effects on Inflaton Decay,JCAP05(2015) 038 [1502.02475]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  62. [64]

    Y. Ema, R. Jinno, K. Mukaida and K. Nakayama,Gravitational particle production in oscillating backgrounds and its cosmological implications,Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 063517 [1604.08898]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  63. [65]

    Y. Ema, R. Jinno and K. Nakayama,High-frequency Graviton from Inflaton Oscillation,JCAP09(2020) 015 [2006.09972]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  64. [66]

    G. Choi, W. Ke and K.A. Olive,Minimal production of prompt gravitational waves during reheating,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 083516 [2402.04310]. – 30 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  65. [67]

    Bernal, Q.-f

    N. Bernal, Q.-f. Wu, X.-J. Xu and Y. Xu,Pre-thermalized gravitational waves, JHEP08(2025) 125 [2503.10756]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  66. [68]

    X.-J. Xu, Y. Xu, Q. Yin and J. Zhu,Full-spectrum analysis of gravitational wave production from inflation to reheating,JHEP10(2025) 141 [2505.08868]

    arXiv 2025

  67. [69]

    Mudrunka and K

    K. Mudrunka and K. Nakayama,High frequency spectrum of primordial gravitational waves,JCAP06(2026) 050 [2601.00378]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  68. [70]

    C. Wang, Y. Xu and W. Zhao,Graviton production from inflaton condensate: Boltzmann vs Bogoliubov,JHEP07(2026) 160 [2604.12687]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  69. [71]

    Wang, Q.-f

    Y. Wang, Q.-f. Wu and X.-J. Xu,A Unified Bogoliubov Approach to Primordial Gravitational Waves: From Inflation to Reheating,2604.17478

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  70. [72]

    Y. Ema, K. Mukaida and K. Nakayama,Scalar field couplings to quadratic curvature and decay into gravitons,JHEP05(2022) 087 [2112.12774]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  71. [73]

    Mudrunka and K

    K. Mudrunka and K. Nakayama,Probing Gauss-Bonnet-corrected inflation with gravitational waves,JCAP05(2024) 069 [2312.15766]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  72. [74]

    Tokareva,Gravitational waves from inflaton decay and bremsstrahlung,Phys

    A. Tokareva,Gravitational waves from inflaton decay and bremsstrahlung,Phys. Lett. B853(2024) 138695 [2312.16691]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  73. [75]

    Strumia and G

    A. Strumia and G. Landini,Optical gravitational waves as signals of gravitationally-decaying particles,JHEP04(2025) 068 [2501.09794]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  74. [76]

    Nakayama, F

    K. Nakayama, F. Takahashi and J. Wada,Gravitational decays of secluded scalars and graviton dark radiation,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 056008 [2512.03662]

    arXiv 2026

  75. [77]

    Xu,Ultra-high frequency gravitational waves from scattering, Bremsstrahlung and decay during reheating,JHEP10(2024) 174 [2407.03256]

    Y. Xu,Ultra-high frequency gravitational waves from scattering, Bremsstrahlung and decay during reheating,JHEP10(2024) 174 [2407.03256]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  76. [78]

    Ghiglieri and M

    J. Ghiglieri and M. Laine,Gravitational wave background from Standard Model physics: Qualitative features,JCAP07(2015) 022 [1504.02569]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  77. [79]

    Ghiglieri, G

    J. Ghiglieri, G. Jackson, M. Laine and Y. Zhu,Gravitational wave background from Standard Model physics: Complete leading order,JHEP07(2020) 092 [2004.11392]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  78. [80]

    Ringwald, J

    A. Ringwald, J. Sch¨ utte-Engel and C. Tamarit,Gravitational Waves as a Big Bang Thermometer,JCAP03(2021) 054 [2011.04731]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  79. [81]

    Ghiglieri, J

    J. Ghiglieri, J. Sch¨ utte-Engel and E. Speranza,Freezing-in gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 023538 [2211.16513]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  80. [82]

    Bauer, M

    M. Bauer, M. Neubert and A. Thamm,Collider Probes of Axion-Like Particles, JHEP12(2017) 044 [1708.00443]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

Showing first 80 references.