Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 115 references

Post-Inflationary Constraints on Nonminimally Coupled Quintessential Inflation

T0 review · 2 major / 3 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 A gravitational-wave bound on reheating rules out the minimal single-exponential quintessence model and predicts thawing dark energy with $w_{\varphi,0}\simeq(-0.90,-0.95)$ in a double-exponential extension.

desk verdict The single-exponential no-go is qualitatively solid, but the quantitative f0 bound is not reproducible without the missing GW-mode and transition details. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05079 v1 pith:I6TUX2NH submitted 2026-08-05 gr-qc astro-ph.COhep-ph

Min Gi Park , Seong Chan Park , Tomo Takahashi , José Jaime Terente Díaz This is my paper
classification gr-qcastro-ph.COhep-ph
keywords quintessentialinflationnonminimalcouplingscalar-tensortheorykinationstochasticgravitational-wavebackgroundreheatingtemperaturedark-energyequationofstatethawingquintessence
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper sets out to show that the reheating epoch after inflation and the present acceleration of the Universe are governed by one and the same constraint. The nonadiabatic transition from inflation into kination — an epoch where the scalar field's kinetic energy dominates the expansion — generates a stochastic gravitational-wave background that redshifts as dark radiation, so limits on the effective number of extra relativistic species, $\Delta N_{\mathrm{eff}}$, impose a lower bound on the reheating temperature. That temperature fixes how long kination lasts and therefore how far the quintessence field can roll before freezing, which in turn fixes how steep the potential must be, on average, to fall from the inflationary scale to today's dark-energy density. In the minimal single-exponential coupling the required steepness is also the late-time slope, so the field is driven onto the matter-scaling attractor — where it behaves like matter with $w_\varphi\to0$ — instead of causing acceleration. The paper shows that a double-exponential coupling removes the conflict by separating the average slope from the asymptotic slope, producing thawing quintessence with $w_{\varphi,0}\simeq(-0.90,-0.95)$, and if it is right, dark-energy surveys become a direct probe of the reheating history.

What carries the argument

The chain that carries the argument has three links. First, the nonminimal coupling ansatz $F(\phi)=1+K(\phi)$, $V(\phi)=V_0K^2(\phi)$, whose Einstein-frame potential $\tilde V = V_0K^2/(1+K)^2$ interpolates between an inflationary plateau and a runaway tail; after kination the conformal factor is essentially unity, so the Jordan-frame field $\phi$ and the canonical field $\varphi$ coincide. Second, the logarithmic slope $\lambda_\varphi \equiv -M_{\mathrm{Pl}}\,d\ln\tilde V/d\varphi$ and the matching condition: the integrated drop $\int\lambda_\varphi\,d\varphi/M_{\mathrm{Pl}}$ over the excursion $\Delta\varphi$ must equal $D_{\mathrm{req}}$, so the average slope $\bar\lambda = D_{\mathrm{req}}M_{\mathrm{Pl}}/\Delta\varphi$ is the quantity the potential must reproduce. Third, the gravitational-wave coefficient $C(f_0)$, computed by solving the tensor mode equation with Bogoliubov coefficients across the nonadiabatic inflation–kination transition, enters the bound $\rho_{r,\mathrm{kin}} \ge 100\,\rho_{\mathrm{GW,kin}}$; this is what caps $\Delta\varphi$ and hence sets the required $\bar\lambda$. The single-exponential coupling $K=e^{-\phi/f_0}$ has a constant slope $\lambda_0=2M_{\mathrm{Pl}}/f_0$, so the cap on $\Delta\varphi$ forces $f_0\lesssim0.3\,M_{\mathrm{Pl}}$ and $\lambda_0^2\gtrsim44$; in the exponential-quintessence attractor analysis, $\lambda_0^2 > 3(1+w_b)$ selects the background-scaling solution, so the field ends with $w_\varphi=w_b$ and $\Omega_\varphi=3/\lambda_0^2$, which during matter domination is the matter-scaling branch. The double-exponential deformation $K=e^{-\phi/f_0}+Ae^{-\phi/f_1}$ keeps the average slope steep over the kination trajectory while the shallower exponential softens the asymptotic slope to $\lambda_1=2M_{\mathrm{Pl}}/f_1=0.7$ near the freezing point, and that decoupling is what permits thawing quintessence — a field frozen near $-1$ that starts rolling only at low redshift.

What would settle it

Recompute $C(f_0)$ by solving the tensor-mode equation across the actual inflation–kination background, specifying the vacuum state, the integration range, the e-fold count $N_{\mathrm{end}}$ between the end of inflation and the onset of kination, and $\rho_{\varphi,\mathrm{kin}}$, then check whether $\rho_{r,\mathrm{kin}}\ge100\,\rho_{\mathrm{GW,kin}}$ still yields the exclusion $f_0\lesssim0.3\,M_{\mathrm{Pl}}$ shown in Fig. 5; if $C$ at $f_0\simeq0.3\,M_{\mathrm{Pl}}$ differs by an order of magnitude, the single-exponential no-go moves or disappears. An independent observational check: if future dark-energy surveys pin the present equation of state below $-0.95$ or confirm phantom crossing at $z\simeq0.4$, the double-exponential benchmark, which requires $w_{\varphi,0}\in(-0.95,-0.90)$ with $w_\varphi\ge-1$ at all redshifts, is ruled out.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated on the paper's own terms, is that the gravitational-wave background generated at the inflation–kination transition constrains the post-inflationary field excursion enough to decide the viability of quintessential inflation. Concretely, the GW abundance fixes a minimum radiation fraction at the onset of kination, $\rho_{r,\mathrm{kin}} \ge 100\,\rho_{\mathrm{GW,kin}}$, which becomes a lower limit on $T_{\mathrm{RH}}$ and an upper limit on the excursion $\Delta\varphi \simeq \sqrt{6}\,M_{\mathrm{Pl}}(N_{\mathrm{RH}}+\ln 2)$. The potential must drop by $D_{\mathrm{req}} = \ln[\tilde V(\varphi_{\mathrm{kin}})/\rho_{\Lambda,0}] \sim 216$–$242$ over this excursion, so the average logarithmic slope must be $\bar\lambda = D_{\mathrm{req}}M_{\mathrm{Pl}}/\Delta\varphi$. For the single-exponential coupling the local slope is constant, $\lambda_0 = 2M_{\mathrm{Pl}}/f_0$, so the matching condition $\bar\lambda \simeq \lambda_0$ forces $f_0 \lesssim 0.3\,M_{\mathrm{Pl}}$, meaning $\lambda_0^2 \gtrsim 44$; the standard attractor analysis of exponential quintessence then places the field unavoidably on the matter-scaling solution with $w_\varphi \to 0$ and $\Omega_\varphi \to 3/\lambda_0^2 \lesssim 0.07$. The double-exponential coupling $K = e^{-\phi/f_0} + A\,e^{-\phi/f_1}$ leaves the average slope steep while the shallower exponential softens the asymptotic slope to $\lambda_1 = 0.7$ near freezing, and the full numerical evolution from inflation to the present epoch yields thawing quintessence with $w_{\varphi,0} \simeq (-0.90,-0.95)$, a deviation from $-1$ large enough for current and forthcoming dark-energy surveys to see.

Load-bearing premise

The whole constraint chain rests on the numerically computed gravitational-wave production coefficient $C(f_0)$, and the paper does not show the mode-equation setup, the number of e-folds between the end of inflation and the onset of kination, or the value of $\rho_{\varphi,\mathrm{kin}}$ used to convert $C$ into the reheating-temperature bound, so the exclusion line $f_0\lesssim0.3\,M_{\mathrm{Pl}}$ stands on numerical details that are not displayed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The minimal single-exponential nonminimal coupling is excluded as a complete theory of inflation plus dark energy: every parameter set that reproduces the dark-energy scale sends the field to the matter-scaling attractor with $\Omega_\varphi\lesssim0.07$, far below the observed dark-energy abundance.
  • Tighter future bounds on $\Delta N_{\mathrm{eff}}$ (CMB-S4 at $\sigma\simeq0.06$) push the lower limit on $T_{\mathrm{RH}}$ upward, shorten the allowed kination duration, and steepen the required average slope, strengthening the case for the double-exponential form.
  • Within the double-exponential framework, measuring the present-day equation of state at $w_{\varphi,0}\simeq-0.9$ effectively measures the reheating temperature, because the matching condition ties the two together.
  • The model predicts $w_\varphi\ge-1$ at all redshifts, so it is cleanly distinguishable from the DESI DR2+Planck+DESY5 CPL fit, which crosses the phantom divide at $z\simeq0.4$.
  • The constraint $f_0\lesssim0.3\,M_{\mathrm{Pl}}$ pushes the scalar spectral index onto the $\tilde N_\star$-dependent floor $n_s\to1-(9+4\tilde N_\star)/(2\tilde N_\star^2)$, giving CMB measurements of $n_s$ an independent handle on the allowed region.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The excursion-cap logic is mechanism-independent: any reheating channel that leaves an irreducible relativistic relic, whether gravitational particle production, evaporating black holes, or another dark-radiation source, caps the post-inflationary field displacement the same way, so the qualitative no-go for constant-slope potentials should survive across reheating models with only the numerical c
  • A future detection of the kination-era gravitational-wave background would measure $C(f_0)$ and thereby the reheating temperature directly, and combined with a precise measurement of $w_{\varphi,0}$ the double-exponential scenario would be testable in two independent channels at once.
  • The double-exponential device acts as a late-time uplift that tunes the frozen potential to the observed dark-energy density without moving any earlier observable, and the same perturbative trick could be ported to other non-oscillatory inflation models to see whether their predictions shift in the same direction.
  • Because the paper sets the conformal coupling of $\varphi$ to nonrelativistic matter to zero in the numerics, the natural next step is to quantify how strong that coupling could be before the predicted $w_{\varphi,0}\simeq-0.9$ moves, so that dark-energy surveys and fifth-force tests would jointly bound the Jordan-frame matter coupling.
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

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies quintessential inflation in a nonminimally coupled scalar-tensor theory, parameterizing the post-inflationary radiation abundance independently of the reheating mechanism. It argues that the stochastic gravitational-wave background generated during the inflation-to-kination transition yields a lower bound on the reheating temperature through Delta N_eff, which in turn bounds the duration of kination and the post-inflationary field excursion. For the single-exponential coupling K(phi)=exp(-phi/f0), the required potential drop forces a steep average logarithmic slope, and since this slope equals the late-time slope, the field is driven to the matter-scaling attractor. A double-exponential deformation decouples the average slope from the asymptotic slope, and full numerical evolution for benchmark parameters gives a thawing equation of state w_phi,0 approximately -0.90 to -0.95. The central qualitative claim is that reheating history directly constrains the viability and late-time behavior of quintessential inflation.

Significance. If the quantitative results hold, the paper establishes a concrete and testable connection between the reheating temperature, the stochastic gravitational-wave background, and the present-day dark-energy equation of state. The analytic logic is coherent: the GW bound bounds the field excursion, a bounded excursion forces a steep average slope, and in the single-exponential model this slope is also the late-time slope, placing the model in the matter-scaling basin. The double-exponential deformation is a natural and minimal resolution, and the numerical evolution from inflation to the present epoch is a valuable consistency check. The authors are also explicit that the normalization A in the double-exponential model is fixed by requiring H(T0)=H0, so the reported w_phi,0 values are outputs rather than fitted quantities. The main weakness is that the quantitative GW production calculation underpinning the bounds f0 <~ 0.3 M_Pl and lambda0^2 >~ 44 is not reproducible from the information given, and the matching condition conflates the frozen potential with the present dark-energy density.

major comments (2)
  1. [Secs. 3.2-3.3, Eqs. (3.30), (3.42), (3.43), and Figs. 1-2] The quantitative GW bound that drives the main no-go argument is not reproducible. The coefficient C(f0) is said to be obtained by solving the mode equation, but the manuscript does not state the initial vacuum state, the integration range in x and conformal time, the numerical method, the criterion defining the end of inflation and onset of kination, or the values of H_end, rho_phi,kin, and N_end used in Eq. (3.30). The combination rho_phi,kin^{1/4} Theta_GW^{3/4} entering T_RH^GW is formally independent of N_end if one assumes rho_phi,kin = 3 M_Pl^2 H_end^2 e^{6 N_end}, but this cancellation is not shown, and the values of H_end and rho_phi,kin are still needed for every f0. Without these inputs the exclusion line in Fig. 5 and the derived constraints f0 <~ 0.3 M_Pl and lambda0^2 >~ 44 in Sec. 4.5 cannot be checked. Please provide a complete specification of the mode-equation calculation, a table of C(f0), H_end, rho_phi,kin, N_end, and the resulting T_RH^GW, and a numerical convergence check.
  2. [Secs. 4.3-4.4, Eqs. (4.23)-(4.31) and Fig. 5] The matching condition identifies the field value at freezing with the epoch at which the scalar energy density equals rho_Lambda,0, but in the same model the field thaws at late times and continues to roll. Since rho_phi decreases after thawing, a configuration with V(phi_freeze) = rho_Lambda,0 would generally end with rho_phi,0 < rho_Lambda,0, so Eq. (4.31) is not the exact present-day matching condition. This conflation affects the position of the white curve in Fig. 5 and the quantitative bound derived from Delta_phi = D_req f0/2. The qualitative conclusion (lambda0^2 much greater than 3 and the matter-scaling attractor) is robust because the correction is of order unity relative to D_req ~ 220, but the paper should state that Eq. (4.31) is a leading-order estimate and, if the quantitative f0 <~ 0.3 M_Pl is to be a claim, replace it with the actual condition rho_phi(T0) = rho_Lambda,0 in the numerical evolution.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 6.1, numerical initial conditions] The numerical evolution from inflation to the present epoch is not fully reproducible because the initial field value, initial field velocity, starting e-fold number, and the criterion for the end of inflation are not listed. Please state these explicitly or provide the code as supplementary material.
  2. [Sec. 5.3 and Fig. 5] The triangular region labeled 'Allowed in the double-exponential model' is characterized only qualitatively. The paper should state the quantitative condition, for example A e^{-phi/f1} << e^{-phi/f0} during the early post-inflationary evolution and the range of A values that make each point in the region consistent with the observed dark-energy density.
  3. [Figs. 1-2 and Sec. 3.2] The relationship between the plotted spectrum and the coefficient C is clear from the captions, but the paper would benefit from stating the normalization convention for the mode function u_k and the vacuum choice in the text, since C(f0) is the key input to the reheating bound.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the no-go and thawing results are genuine outputs of the model equations plus external CMB, DESI, and ΔNeff constraints.

full rationale

The load-bearing chain is not circular. The single-exponential bound f0 ≲ 0.3 M_Pl follows from intersecting the matching condition Eq. (4.31), 2M_Pl/f0 = D_req(f0)M_Pl/Δφ(f0, T_RH), with the independent GW/T_RH bound Eq. (3.43). No quantity in either condition is defined in terms of the late-time equation of state: D_req is fixed by the CMB-normalized inflationary potential and the observed ρΛ,0, while Δφ and the GW bound depend on the post-inflationary background and on C(f0). The resulting λ0^2 ≳ 44 is then fed into the standard exponential-quintessence attractor results [82–84], which are external dynamical-systems results, not derived from the present model. In the double-exponential extension, the normalization A is fixed by demanding H(T0) = H0, but wφ,0 is a numerical output of the evolution, not a fitted target; the benchmark λ1 = 0.7 is imposed from DESI-based analyses, which is external input, not circular. Ref. [57] (a coauthor) supplies the model ansatz F = 1 + K, V = V0K^2 and the exponential coupling, but the paper does not invoke [57] to justify the attractor result or the GW bound; those follow from the paper's own equations and standard external results. The principal caveat is reproducibility rather than circularity: the numerical evaluation of C(f0), the e-fold N_end between the end of inflation and the onset of kination, and the value of ρφ,kin used to convert C into T_RH are not fully specified, so the precise numerical position of the f0 exclusion line is difficult to reproduce from the text. That is a completeness concern, not a case of a prediction reducing by construction to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles or forces are introduced; the double-exponential coupling is a potential shape. The key free parameters are f0, lambda1, A, and T_RH; A is fitted to the observed dark energy scale, and lambda1 is chosen from DESI-motivated values. The central bound rests on standard cosmology, Bogoliubov particle production, and the dynamical-systems attractor analysis.

free parameters (4)
  • f0 = 0.2 M_Pl (benchmark); single-exponential constrained to f0 <= 0.3 M_Pl
    Decay scale of the steep exponential in K(phi); sets the inflationary plateau and the steep post-inflationary slope lambda0 = 2 M_Pl/f0.
  • lambda1 (or f1 = 2 M_Pl/lambda1) = 0.6, 0.7, 0.8 (benchmarks), motivated by DESI exponential-quintessence fits
    Asymptotic logarithmic slope of the shallow exponential; controls the late-time equation of state.
  • A = ~2.5e-51 (lambda1=0.7, f0=0.2, T_RH=1e8 GeV)
    Amplitude of the shallow exponential; fixed by matching the present Hubble rate H(T0) to the observed H0, i.e., setting the dark-energy scale.
  • T_RH (or Theta) = 1e8 GeV benchmark; analytically free with lower bound from GWs
    Reheating temperature (initial radiation fraction Theta) parameterizing the post-inflationary radiation abundance independent of mechanism; determines kination duration and field excursion.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Classical equivalence of Jordan and Einstein frames; gravitational particle production computed in the Einstein frame
    The paper uses the Einstein-frame potential and mode equation for GW production; the quantum-level frame equivalence is debated (Refs. [75-78]), and the text itself flags this.
  • domain assumption Field-space factor J ~ 1 at the onset of kination and throughout post-inflationary evolution
    Sec. 2.2 states J(phi_kin) ~ 1 from numerical evolution, letting the paper identify phi and phi in the analytic treatment of kination and freezing.
  • domain assumption The scalar potential is negligible during kination, so phi' = sqrt(6) M_Pl (rho_kin/rho_tot)^(1/2)
    Sec. 3.1 assumes tilde V << phidot^2/2 during kination; justified by K(phi_kin) = O(10^-3) in the models considered.
  • domain assumption Produced radiation thermalizes and g* takes Standard Model values (106.75 at T_RH, 3.91/3.36 late)
    Eqs. (3.13)-(3.15) and (3.38) assume a thermal bath; standard in reheating computations.
  • domain assumption Matter coupling in the Einstein frame, F,phi/(2F) rho_m, is negligible throughout
    Sec. 6.1 argues rho_m is subdominant early and F,phi/F is strongly suppressed at late times because K << 1.
  • standard math Exponential-quintessence attractor results of Refs. [82-84] apply
    Used in Sec. 4.5 to identify the matter-scaling attractor for lambda0^2 > 3(1+w_b).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Post-Inflationary Constraints on Nonminimally Coupled Quintessential Inflation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/I6TUX2NH

@misc{pith2026260805079,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Post-Inflationary Constraints on Nonminimally Coupled Quintessential Inflation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/I6TUX2NH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05079}
}
abstract

We investigate quintessential inflation in a nonminimally coupled scalar-tensor theory, parameterizing the post-inflationary radiation abundance independently of the reheating mechanism. The nonadiabatic inflation-kination transition generates a stochastic gravitational-wave background whose contribution to $\Delta N_{\textrm{eff}}$ imposes a lower limit on the reheating temperature. Because this temperature dictates the duration of kination and the available scalar-field excursion, it directly constrains the present-day dark-energy equation of state. While a single-exponential coupling achieves the required post-inflationary potential drop, the same constant slope does not provide viable late-time acceleration. A double-exponential deformation resolves this tension by decoupling the average slope governing the total potential drop from the asymptotic slope driving cosmic acceleration. Full numerical solutions confirm this picture, yielding a thawing quintessence regime with $w_{\varphi,0}\simeq (-0.90, -0.95)$ for our benchmarks. Our results demonstrate that future dark-energy measurements can directly probe the post-inflationary reheating history of the Universe.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05079 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Dimensionless gravitational particle-production spectrum for the representative [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Dimensionless particle-production coefficient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Inflationary predictions of the single-exponential model in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Potential energy at the onset of kination, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Reheating constraints and the frozen potential scale in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Late-time evolution in the single-exponential model for representative values of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Logarithmic slope profile for the double-exponential potential. The slope remains [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Numerical background evolution for the double-exponential benchmark of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Late-time evolution of the scalar EoS parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_9.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

115 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [2]

    A. A. Starobinsky,A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity,Phys. Lett. B91(1980) 99–102

    1980

  2. [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–L63

    1980

  3. [4]

    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), no. 3 467–479. 44

    1981

  4. [5]

    A. H. Guth,The Inflationary Universe: A Possible Solution to the Horizon and Flatness Problems,Phys. Rev. D23(1981) 347–356

    1981

  5. [6]

    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) 389–393

    1982

  6. [7]

    E. J. Copeland, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa,Dynamics of dark energy,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D15(2006) 1753–1936, [hep-th/0603057]

    arXiv 2006

  7. [8]

    Frieman, M

    J. Frieman, M. Turner, and D. Huterer,Dark Energy and the Accelerating Universe, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.46(2008) 385–432, [arXiv:0803.0982]

    arXiv 2008

  8. [9]

    Li, X.-D

    M. Li, X.-D. Li, S. Wang, and Y. Wang,Dark Energy,Commun. Theor. Phys.56 (2011) 525–604, [arXiv:1103.5870]

    arXiv 2011

Show all 115 references
  1. [10]

    Huterer and D

    D. Huterer and D. L. Shafer,Dark energy two decades after: observables, probes, consistency tests,Rept. Prog. Phys.81(2018), no. 1 016901, [arXiv:1709.01091]

    2018 arXiv

  2. [11]

    Garc ´ ıa-Garc ´ ıa, P

    C. Garc ´ ıa-Garc ´ ıa, P. G. Ferreira, and W. J. Wolf,The Status of Single Scalar Field Dark Energy,arXiv:2607.07777

    arXiv

  3. [12]

    Dimopoulos,Introduction to Cosmic Inflation and Dark Energy

    K. Dimopoulos,Introduction to Cosmic Inflation and Dark Energy. CRC Press, 11, 2020

    2020

  4. [13]

    S. M. Carroll,Why is the universe accelerating?,eConfC0307282(2003) TTH09, [astro-ph/0310342]

    2003 arXiv

  5. [14]

    P. J. E. Peebles and A. Vilenkin,Quintessential inflation,Phys. Rev. D59(1999) 063505, [astro-ph/9810509]

    1999 arXiv

  6. [15]

    de Haro and L

    J. de Haro and L. A. Sal´ o,A Review of Quintessential Inflation,Galaxies9(2021), no. 4 73, [arXiv:2108.11144]

    2021 arXiv

  7. [16]

    Bettoni and J

    D. Bettoni and J. Rubio,Quintessential Inflation: A Tale of Emergent and Broken Symmetries,Galaxies10(2022), no. 1 22, [arXiv:2112.11948]

    2022 arXiv

  8. [17]

    Peloso and F

    M. Peloso and F. Rosati,On the construction of quintessential inflation models, JHEP12(1999) 026, [hep-ph/9908271]

    1999 arXiv

  9. [18]

    Dimopoulos,Towards a model of quintessential inflation,Nucl

    K. Dimopoulos,Towards a model of quintessential inflation,Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.95(2001) 70–73, [astro-ph/0012298]

    2001 arXiv

  10. [19]

    Dimopoulos,Models of quintessential inflation, in5th International Conference on Particle Physics and the Early Universe, 11, 2001.astro-ph/0111500

    K. Dimopoulos,Models of quintessential inflation, in5th International Conference on Particle Physics and the Early Universe, 11, 2001.astro-ph/0111500. 45

    2001 arXiv

  11. [20]

    Dimopoulos and J

    K. Dimopoulos and J. W. F. Valle,Modeling quintessential inflation,Astropart. Phys.18(2002) 287–306, [astro-ph/0111417]

    2002 arXiv

  12. [21]

    Wali Hossain, R

    M. Wali Hossain, R. Myrzakulov, M. Sami, and E. N. Saridakis,Unification of inflation and dark energy ` a la quintessential inflation,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D24 (2015), no. 05 1530014, [arXiv:1410.6100]

    2015 arXiv

  13. [22]

    Allahverdi, R

    R. Allahverdi, R. Brandenberger, F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, and A. Mazumdar,Reheating in Inflationary Cosmology: Theory and Applications,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.60 (2010) 27–51, [arXiv:1001.2600]

    2010 arXiv

  14. [23]

    K. D. Lozanov,Lectures on Reheating after Inflation,arXiv:1907.04402

    1907 arXiv

  15. [24]

    Haro,Different reheating mechanisms in quintessence inflation,Phys

    J. Haro,Different reheating mechanisms in quintessence inflation,Phys. Rev. D99 (2019), no. 4 043510, [arXiv:1807.07367]

    2019 arXiv

  16. [25]

    L. H. Ford,Gravitational Particle Creation and Inflation,Phys. Rev. D35(1987) 2955

    1987

  17. [26]

    E. J. Chun, S. Scopel, and I. Zaballa,Gravitational reheating in quintessential inflation,JCAP07(2009) 022, [arXiv:0904.0675]

    2009 arXiv

  18. [27]

    Dimopoulos and T

    K. Dimopoulos and T. Markkanen,Non-minimal gravitational reheating during kination,JCAP06(2018) 021, [arXiv:1803.07399]

    2018 arXiv

  19. [28]

    J. Haro, W. Yang, and S. Pan,Reheating in quintessential inflation via gravitational production of heavy massive particles: A detailed analysis,JCAP01(2019) 023, [arXiv:1811.07371]

    2019 arXiv

  20. [29]

    E. W. Kolb and A. J. Long,Cosmological gravitational particle production and its implications for cosmological relics,Rev. Mod. Phys.96(2024), no. 4 045005, [arXiv:2312.09042]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [30]

    G. C. Dorsch, L. Miranda, and N. Yokomizo,Gravitational reheating in Starobinsky inflation,JCAP11(2024) 050, [arXiv:2406.04161]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [31]

    Jenks, E

    L. Jenks, E. W. Kolb, and K. Thyme,Gravitational particle production of scalars: analytic and numerical approaches including early reheating,JHEP05(2025) 077, [arXiv:2410.03938]

    2025 arXiv

  23. [32]

    G. N. Felder, L. Kofman, and A. D. Linde,Instant preheating,Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 123523, [hep-ph/9812289]

    1999 arXiv

  24. [33]

    G. N. Felder, L. Kofman, and A. D. Linde,Inflation and preheating in NO models, Phys. Rev. D60(1999) 103505, [hep-ph/9903350]. 46

    1999 arXiv

  25. [34]

    A. H. Campos, H. C. Reis, and R. Rosenfeld,Preheating in quintessential inflation, Phys. Lett. B575(2003) 151–156, [hep-ph/0210152]

    2003 arXiv

  26. [35]

    Dimopoulos, L

    K. Dimopoulos, L. Donaldson Wood, and C. Owen,Instant preheating in quintessential inflation withα-attractors,Phys. Rev. D97(2018), no. 6 063525, [arXiv:1712.01760]

    2018 arXiv

  27. [36]

    Opferkuch, P

    T. Opferkuch, P. Schwaller, and B. A. Stefanek,Ricci Reheating,JCAP07(2019) 016, [arXiv:1905.06823]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [37]

    Bettoni, A

    D. Bettoni, A. Lopez-Eiguren, and J. Rubio,Hubble-induced phase transitions on the lattice with applications to Ricci reheating,JCAP01(2022), no. 01 002, [arXiv:2107.09671]

    2022 arXiv

  29. [38]

    Feng and M.-z

    B. Feng and M.-z. Li,Curvaton reheating in nonoscillatory inflationary models,Phys. Lett. B564(2003) 169–174, [hep-ph/0212213]

    2003 arXiv

  30. [39]

    Matsuda,NO Curvatons or Hybrid Quintessential Inflation,JCAP08(2007) 003, [arXiv:0707.1948]

    T. Matsuda,NO Curvatons or Hybrid Quintessential Inflation,JCAP08(2007) 003, [arXiv:0707.1948]

    2007 arXiv

  31. [40]

    J. C. Bueno Sanchez and K. Dimopoulos,Curvaton reheating allows TeV Hubble scale in NO inflation,JCAP11(2007) 007, [arXiv:0707.3967]

    2007 arXiv

  32. [41]

    Dalianis and G

    I. Dalianis and G. P. Kodaxis,Reheating in Runaway Inflation Models via the Evaporation of Mini Primordial Black Holes,Galaxies10(2022), no. 1 31, [arXiv:2112.15576]

    2022

  33. [42]

    Riajul Haque, E

    M. Riajul Haque, E. Kpatcha, D. Maity, and Y. Mambrini,Primordial black hole reheating,Phys. Rev. D108(2023), no. 6 063523, [arXiv:2305.10518]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [43]

    Dimopoulos and L

    K. Dimopoulos and L. Donaldson-Wood,Warm quintessential inflation,Phys. Lett. B796(2019) 26–31, [arXiv:1906.09648]

    2019 arXiv

  35. [44]

    J. G. Rosa and L. B. Ventura,Warm Little Inflaton becomes Dark Energy,Phys. Lett. B798(2019) 134984, [arXiv:1906.11835]

    2019 arXiv

  36. [45]

    Dimopoulos and C

    K. Dimopoulos and C. Owen,Quintessential Inflation withα-attractors,JCAP06 (2017) 027, [arXiv:1703.00305]

    2017 arXiv

  37. [46]

    van de Bruck, K

    C. van de Bruck, K. Dimopoulos, C. Longden, and C. Owen,Gauss-Bonnet-coupled Quintessential Inflation,arXiv:1707.06839

    arXiv

  38. [47]

    Faraoni,Inflation and quintessence with nonminimal coupling,Phys

    V. Faraoni,Inflation and quintessence with nonminimal coupling,Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 023504, [gr-qc/0002091]

    2000 arXiv

  39. [48]

    Wetterich,Cosmon inflation,Phys

    C. Wetterich,Cosmon inflation,Phys. Lett. B726(2013) 15–22, [arXiv:1303.4700]. 47

    2013 arXiv

  40. [49]

    Dimopoulos,Jointly modelling Cosmic Inflation and Dark Energy,J

    K. Dimopoulos,Jointly modelling Cosmic Inflation and Dark Energy,J. Phys. Conf. Ser.2105(2021), no. 1 012001, [arXiv:2106.14966]

    2021 arXiv

  41. [50]

    Dimopoulos and S

    K. Dimopoulos and S. S´ anchez L´ opez,Quintessential inflation in Palatinif(R) gravity,Phys. Rev. D103(2021), no. 4 043533, [arXiv:2012.06831]

    2021 arXiv

  42. [51]

    Dimopoulos, A

    K. Dimopoulos, A. Karam, S. S´ anchez L´ opez, and E. Tomberg,Modelling Quintessential Inflation in Palatini-Modified Gravity,Galaxies10(2022), no. 2 57, [arXiv:2203.05424]

    2022 arXiv

  43. [52]

    Dimopoulos, A

    K. Dimopoulos, A. Karam, S. S´ anchez L´ opez, and E. Tomberg,Palatini R2 quintessential inflation,JCAP10(2022) 076, [arXiv:2206.14117]

    2022 arXiv

  44. [53]

    J. J. Terente D ´ ıaz, K. Dimopoulos, M. Karˇ ciauskas, and A. Racioppi,Gauss-Bonnet Dark Energy and the speed of gravitational waves,JCAP10(2023) 031, [arXiv:2307.06163]

    2023 arXiv

  45. [54]

    J. J. Terente D ´ ıaz, K. Dimopoulos, M. Karˇ ciauskas, and A. Racioppi,Quintessence in the Weyl-Gauss-Bonnet model,JCAP02(2024) 040, [arXiv:2310.08128]

    2024 arXiv

  46. [55]

    Dimopoulos, C

    K. Dimopoulos, C. Dioguardi, G. H¨ utsi, and A. Racioppi,Quintessential inflation in Palatini F(R, X) gravity,Eur. Phys. J. Plus140(2025), no. 11 1109, [arXiv:2503.21610]

    2025

  47. [56]

    Dimopoulos, C

    K. Dimopoulos, C. Dioguardi, I. D. Gialamas, and A. Racioppi,Quasi-pole quintessential inflation in metric-affine gravity,arXiv:2603.15776

  48. [57]

    S. C. Park,Nonminimally Coupled Quintessential Inflation,PTEP2025(2025), no. 10 103E02, [arXiv:2412.08833]

    2025

  49. [58]

    W. J. Wolf, C. Garc ´ ıa-Garc ´ ıa, T. Anton, and P. G. Ferreira,Assessing Cosmological Evidence for Nonminimal Coupling,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025), no. 8 081001, [arXiv:2504.07679]

    2025 arXiv

  50. [59]

    S´ anchez L´ opez, A

    S. S´ anchez L´ opez, A. Karam, and D. K. Hazra,Non-Minimally Coupled Quintessence in Light of DESI,arXiv:2510.14941

  51. [60]

    Gouttenoire, G

    Y. Gouttenoire, G. Servant, and P. Simakachorn,Kination cosmology from scalar fields and gravitational-wave signatures,arXiv:2111.01150

    arXiv

  52. [61]

    M. He, R. Jinno, K. Kamada, S. C. Park, A. A. Starobinsky, and J. Yokoyama,On the violent preheating in the mixed Higgs-R 2 inflationary model,Phys. Lett. B791 (2019) 36–42, [arXiv:1812.10099]

    2019 arXiv

  53. [62]

    D. Y. Cheong, S. M. Lee, and S. C. Park,Reheating in models with non-minimal coupling in metric and Palatini formalisms,JCAP02(2022), no. 02 029, [arXiv:2111.00825]. 48

    2022 arXiv

  54. [63]

    de Haro,Reheating formulas in quintessential inflation via gravitational particle production,Phys

    J. de Haro,Reheating formulas in quintessential inflation via gravitational particle production,Phys. Rev. D109(2024), no. 2 023517, [arXiv:2310.02245]

    2024 arXiv

  55. [64]

    Magnano and L

    G. Magnano and L. M. Sokolowski,On physical equivalence between nonlinear gravity theories and a general relativistic selfgravitating scalar field,Phys. Rev. D50(1994) 5039–5059, [gr-qc/9312008]

    1994 arXiv

  56. [65]

    Faraoni and S

    V. Faraoni and S. Nadeau,The (pseudo)issue of the conformal frame revisited,Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 023501, [gr-qc/0612075]

    2007 arXiv

  57. [66]

    Catena, M

    R. Catena, M. Pietroni, and L. Scarabello,Einstein and Jordan reconciled: a frame-invariant approach to scalar-tensor cosmology,Phys. Rev. D76(2007) 084039, [astro-ph/0604492]

    2007 arXiv

  58. [67]

    Catena, M

    R. Catena, M. Pietroni, and L. Scarabello,Local transformations of units in scalar-tensor cosmology,J. Phys. A40(2007) 6883–6888, [hep-th/0610292]

    2007 arXiv

  59. [68]

    Deruelle and M

    N. Deruelle and M. Sasaki,Conformal equivalence in classical gravity: the example of ’Veiled’ General Relativity,Springer Proc. Phys.137(2011) 247–260, [arXiv:1007.3563]

    2011 arXiv

  60. [69]

    Gong, J.-c

    J.-O. Gong, J.-c. Hwang, W.-I. Park, M. Sasaki, and Y.-S. Song,Conformal invariance of curvature perturbation,JCAP09(2011) 023, [arXiv:1107.1840]

    2011 arXiv

  61. [70]

    Chiba and M

    T. Chiba and M. Yamaguchi,Conformal-Frame (In)dependence of Cosmological Observations in Scalar-Tensor Theory,JCAP10(2013) 040, [arXiv:1308.1142]

    2013 arXiv

  62. [71]

    Prokopec and J

    T. Prokopec and J. Weenink,Frame independent cosmological perturbations,JCAP 09(2013) 027, [arXiv:1304.6737]

    2013 arXiv

  63. [72]

    Postma and M

    M. Postma and M. Volponi,Equivalence of the Einstein and Jordan frames,Phys. Rev. D90(2014), no. 10 103516, [arXiv:1407.6874]

    2014 arXiv

  64. [73]

    Racioppi and M

    A. Racioppi and M. Vasar,On the number of e-folds in the Jordan and Einstein frames,Eur. Phys. J. Plus137(2022), no. 5 637, [arXiv:2111.09677]

    2022 arXiv

  65. [74]

    J. J. T. D ´ ıaz and M. Karˇ ciauskas,Comoving curvature perturbation in Jordan and Einstein frames,Phys. Rev. D108(2023), no. 8 083535, [arXiv:2305.15326]

    2023 arXiv

  66. [75]

    I. L. Shapiro and H. Takata,Conformal transformation in gravity,Phys. Lett. B361 (1995) 31–37, [hep-th/9504162]

    1995 arXiv

  67. [76]

    C. F. Steinwachs and A. Y. Kamenshchik,One-loop divergences for gravity non-minimally coupled to a multiplet of scalar fields: calculation in the Jordan frame. I. The main results,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 024026, [arXiv:1101.5047]. 49

    2011 arXiv

  68. [77]

    A. Y. Kamenshchik and C. F. Steinwachs,Question of quantum equivalence between Jordan frame and Einstein frame,Phys. Rev. D91(2015), no. 8 084033, [arXiv:1408.5769]

    2015 arXiv

  69. [78]

    Falls and M

    K. Falls and M. Herrero-Valea,Frame (In)equivalence in Quantum Field Theory and Cosmology,Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019), no. 7 595, [arXiv:1812.08187]

    2019 arXiv

  70. [79]

    Caprini and D

    C. Caprini and D. G. Figueroa,Cosmological backgrounds of gravitational waves, Class. Quant. Grav.35(2018), no. 16 163001, [arXiv:1801.04268]

    2018 arXiv

  71. [80]

    Haro Cases and L

    J. Haro Cases and L. Arest´ e Sal´ o,The Spectrum of Gravitational Waves, Their Overproduction in Quintessential Inflation and Its Influence in the Reheating Temperature,Universe6(2020), no. 6 87, [arXiv:2004.11843]

    2020 arXiv

  72. [81]

    O. S. An, J. U. Kang, Y. J. Kim, and U. R. Mun,Bridging between reheating and late-time observations in quintessential inflation,arXiv:2503.05202

    arXiv

  73. [82]

    E. J. Copeland, A. R. Liddle, and D. Wands,Exponential potentials and cosmological scaling solutions,Phys. Rev. D57(1998) 4686–4690, [gr-qc/9711068]

    1998 arXiv

  74. [83]

    Sava¸ s Arapo˘ glu and A

    A. Sava¸ s Arapo˘ glu and A. Emrah Y¨ ukselci,Dynamical System Analysis of Quintessence Models with Exponential Potential - Revisited,Mod. Phys. Lett. A34 (2019), no. 09 1950069, [arXiv:1711.03824]

    2019 arXiv

  75. [84]

    Bahamonde, C

    S. Bahamonde, C. G. B¨ ohmer, S. Carloni, E. J. Copeland, W. Fang, and N. Tamanini,Dynamical systems applied to cosmology: dark energy and modified gravity,Phys. Rept.775-777(2018) 1–122, [arXiv:1712.03107]. [85]DESICollaboration, M. Abdul Karim et al.,DESI DR2 results. II. Me...

    2018 arXiv

  76. [86]

    E. J. Copeland, P. Millington, and S. S. Mu˜ noz,Fifth forces and broken scale symmetries in the Jordan frame,JCAP02(2022), no. 02 016, [arXiv:2111.06357]

    2022 arXiv

  77. [87]

    R. H. Dicke,Mach’s principle and invariance under transformation of units,Phys. Rev.125(1962) 2163–2167

    1962

  78. [88]

    Faraoni, E

    V. Faraoni, E. Gunzig, and P. Nardone,Conformal transformations in classical gravitational theories and in cosmology,Fund. Cosmic Phys.20(1999) 121, [gr-qc/9811047]

    1999 arXiv

  79. [89]

    M. P. Dabrowski, J. Garecki, and D. B. Blaschke,Conformal transformations and conformal invariance in gravitation,Annalen Phys.18(2009) 13–32, [arXiv:0806.2683]. 50

    2009 arXiv

  80. [90]

    J. P. Mimoso and D. Wands,Massless fields in scalar - tensor cosmologies,Phys. Rev. D51(1995) 477–489, [gr-qc/9405025]

    1995 arXiv

  81. [91]

    Garcia-Bellido, D

    J. Garcia-Bellido, D. G. Figueroa, and J. Rubio,Preheating in the Standard Model with the Higgs-Inflaton coupled to gravity,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 063531, [arXiv:0812.4624]

    2009 arXiv

  82. [92]

    Domcke and K

    V. Domcke and K. Schmitz,Inflation from High-Scale Supersymmetry Breaking, Phys. Rev. D97(2018), no. 11 115025, [arXiv:1712.08121]

    2018 arXiv

  83. [93]

    Tang and Y.-L

    Y. Tang and Y.-L. Wu,Conformal transformation with multiple scalar fields and geometric property of field space with Einstein-like solutions,Phys. Rev. D104 (2021), no. 6 064042, [arXiv:2105.04726]

    2021 arXiv

  84. [94]

    J. L. Cook, E. Dimastrogiovanni, D. A. Easson, and L. M. Krauss,Reheating predictions in single field inflation,JCAP04(2015) 047, [arXiv:1502.04673]

    2015 arXiv

  85. [95]

    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. arXiv:0907.5424

    2011 arXiv

  86. [96]

    Hashiba and J

    S. Hashiba and J. Yokoyama,Gravitational reheating through conformally coupled superheavy scalar particles,JCAP01(2019) 028, [arXiv:1809.05410]

    2019 arXiv

  87. [97]

    de Haro, S

    J. de Haro, S. Pan, and L. Arest´ e Sal´ o,Understanding gravitational particle production in quintessential inflation,JCAP06(2019) 056, [arXiv:1903.01181]. [98]PlanckCollaboration, N. Aghanim et al.,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) ...

    2019 arXiv

  88. [99]

    Sch¨ oneberg,The 2024 BBN baryon abundance update,JCAP06(2024) 006, [arXiv:2401.15054]

    N. Sch¨ oneberg,The 2024 BBN baryon abundance update,JCAP06(2024) 006, [arXiv:2401.15054]. [100]CMB-S4Collaboration, K. N. Abazajian et al.,CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition. 10, 2016

    2024

  89. [101]

    T.-H. Yeh, J. Shelton, K. A. Olive, and B. D. Fields,Probing physics beyond the standard model: limits from BBN and the CMB independently and combined,JCAP 10(2022) 046, [arXiv:2207.13133]

    2022 arXiv

  90. [102]

    Pitrou, A

    C. Pitrou, A. Coc, J.-P. Uzan, and E. Vangioni,Precision big bang nucleosynthesis with improved Helium-4 predictions,Phys. Rept.754(2018) 1–66, [arXiv:1801.08023]

    2018 arXiv

  91. [103]

    Baumann,Primordial Cosmology,PoSTASI2017(2018) 009, [arXiv:1807.03098]

    D. Baumann,Primordial Cosmology,PoSTASI2017(2018) 009, [arXiv:1807.03098]. 51

    2018 arXiv

  92. [104]

    Husdal,On Effective Degrees of Freedom in the Early Universe,Galaxies4(2016), no

    L. Husdal,On Effective Degrees of Freedom in the Early Universe,Galaxies4(2016), no. 4 78, [arXiv:1609.04979]

    2016 arXiv

  93. [105]

    Balkenhol et al.,Inflation at the End of 2025: Constraints onrandn s Using the Latest CMB and BAO Data,arXiv:2512.10613

    L. Balkenhol et al.,Inflation at the End of 2025: Constraints onrandn s Using the Latest CMB and BAO Data,arXiv:2512.10613. [106]PlanckCollaboration, Y. Akrami et al.,Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A10, [arXiv:1807.06211]. [107]Ata...

    2020 arXiv

  94. [108]

    Brissenden, K

    L. Brissenden, K. Dimopoulos, and S. S´ anchez L´ opez,Non-oscillating early dark energy and quintessence fromα-attractors,Astropart. Phys.157(2024) 102925, [arXiv:2301.03572]

    2024 arXiv

  95. [109]

    Barreiro, E

    T. Barreiro, E. J. Copeland, and N. J. Nunes,Quintessence arising from exponential potentials,Phys. Rev. D61(2000) 127301, [astro-ph/9910214]

    2000 arXiv

  96. [110]

    O. F. Ramadan, J. Sakstein, and D. Rubin,DESI constraints on exponential quintessence,Phys. Rev. D110(2024), no. 4 L041303, [arXiv:2405.18747]

    2024 arXiv

  97. [111]

    Akrami, G

    Y. Akrami, G. Alestas, and S. Nesseris,Has DESI detected exponential quintessence?, arXiv:2504.04226

    arXiv

  98. [112]

    Gourgoulhon,3+1 Formalism in General Relativity: Bases of Numerical Relativity

    E. Gourgoulhon,3+1 Formalism in General Relativity: Bases of Numerical Relativity. 846. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2012

    2012

  99. [113]

    Dong and C

    F. Dong and C. Park,The Most Probable Behavior of the Dark Energy Equation of State Indicates a Thawing Quintessence Field: Tomographic Alcock–Paczy´ nski Test with Redshift-space Correlation Function II,Astrophys. J.998(2026), no. 1 66, [arXiv:2510.24089]

    2026

  100. [114]

    Chevallier and D

    M. Chevallier and D. Polarski,Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D10(2001) 213–224, [gr-qc/0009008]

    2001 arXiv

  101. [115]

    E. V. Linder,Exploring the expansion history of the universe,Phys. Rev. Lett.90 (2003) 091301, [astro-ph/0208512]

    2003 arXiv

  102. [116]

    F. Dong, C. Park, S. E. Hong, J. Kim, H. Seong Hwang, H. Park, and S. Appleby, Tomographic Alcock–Paczy´ nski Test with Redshift-space Correlation Function: Evidence for the Dark Energy Equation-of-state Parameter w>−1,Astrophys. J. 953(2023), no. 1 98, [arXiv:2305.00206]

    2023 arXiv

  103. [117]

    S. M. Carroll,Lecture notes on general relativity,gr-qc/9712019. 52

    arXiv

  104. [118]

    Koivisto,Covariant conservation of energy momentum in modified gravities, Class

    T. Koivisto,Covariant conservation of energy momentum in modified gravities, Class. Quant. Grav.23(2006) 4289–4296, [gr-qc/0505128]

    2006 arXiv

  105. [119]

    Maartens,Causal thermodynamics in relativity, 9, 1996.astro-ph/9609119

    R. Maartens,Causal thermodynamics in relativity, 9, 1996.astro-ph/9609119

    1996 arXiv

  106. [120]

    Karˇ ciauskas and J

    M. Karˇ ciauskas and J. J. T. D ´ ıaz,Slow-roll inflation in the Jordan frame,Phys. Rev. D106(2022), no. 8 083526, [arXiv:2206.08677]

    2022 arXiv

  107. [121]

    Kuusk, M

    P. Kuusk, M. R¨ unkla, M. Saal, and O. Vilson,Invariant slow-roll parameters in scalar–tensor theories,Class. Quant. Grav.33(2016), no. 19 195008, [arXiv:1605.07033]. 53

    2016 arXiv

Pith tools

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