Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 75 references

A note on the gravitational dark matter production

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read A conformally coupled scalar produced only by gravity can be all of the dark matter only in two narrow mass windows, one light and one near $10^{11}$ GeV.

desk verdict A useful little note: mostly a re-derivation of the authors' own earlier work, with one genuinely new delayed-decay correction that shifts the reheating temperature by a small factor; the mass windows all hinge on an imported production-efficiency formula that deserves independent checking. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06626 v3 pith:7MIIBIDE submitted 2024-12-09 gr-qc astro-ph.CO

classification gr-qcastro-ph.CO PACS 04.20.-q98.80.Jk98.80.Bp
keywords gravitationaldarkmatterproductionreheatingtemperaturequintessentialinflationconformallycoupledscalarinflatondecayWKBBogoliubovcoefficientsmassbounds
topics Dark Matter
open problems Dark Matter
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 note sets out to show that a conformally coupled scalar produced purely by gravity—with no couplings beyond the curvature coupling—cannot have an arbitrary mass. Combining the analytic efficiency $\Theta_A\simeq2.26(m_A/M_{\rm pl})^{5/2}$ with the reheating temperature bounds from Big Bang nucleosynthesis and the gravitino constraint, it derives two narrow viable windows. In gravitational reheating with a stiff post-inflationary phase the dark matter is comparatively light (for quintessential inflation, about $10^1$–$10^2$ GeV in the general case, with an upper bound of $10^{-13}M_{\rm pl}$ in the maximum-temperature case), while in inflaton-decay reheating from a quadratic potential it must weigh around $10^{11}$ GeV. The paper also re-derives the delayed-decay reheating temperature as $T_{\rm reh}\simeq1.22\times10^{-25}(M_{\rm pl}/m_Y)^2M_{\rm pl}$, within an order of magnitude of the instantaneous result. If these bounds hold, measuring the dark matter mass would discriminate between the two reheating histories.

What carries the argument

The central object is the heating efficiency $\Theta_A = \rho_{A,\rm END}/\rho_{B,\rm END}$ of a conformally coupled scalar, evaluated analytically by WKB Bogoliubov coefficients in the complex plane as $\Theta_A \simeq 2.26 (m_A/M_{\rm pl})^{5/2}$ when $m_A\ll H_{\rm END}$ and $H_{\rm END}\simeq10^{-6}M_{\rm pl}$. This one formula converts a scalar mass into the fraction of background energy that becomes dark matter, and all mass bounds in Sections III and IV are rescalings of it. The argument's second engine is the exact Boltzmann integral for the radiation produced by decaying X-particles or by the inflaton, Eq. (65); imposing late-time radiation conservation produces the corrected delayed-decay reheating temperature and the factor $25/9$ in Eq. (79).

What would settle it

Compute the Bogoliubov coefficient numerically for a conformally coupled scalar with $m_A\simeq10^{-12}M_{\rm pl}$ and $H_{\rm END}\simeq10^{-6}M_{\rm pl}$: if the resulting efficiency differs from $2.26(m_A/M_{\rm pl})^{5/2}$, the mass windows shift; or find a reheating history consistent with the quoted $T_{\rm reh}$ bounds that yields $\Omega_Yh^2=0.12$ for a scalar mass between the two windows, which would refute the dichotomy.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the observed dark-matter abundance $\Omega_Y h^2=0.12$ can be reproduced by a massive scalar field that is conformally coupled to curvature and otherwise interacts only gravitationally, provided its mass lies in one of two disjoint intervals fixed by the reheating mechanism. In the gravitational-reheating branch, where the inflaton potential behaves like $\varphi^{2n}$ near its minimum with $n\ge3$, the maximum-temperature case gives $1.48\times10^{-17}\le m_Y/M_{\rm pl}\ll10^{-13}$, and the general decay-before-radiation case restricts quintessential inflation to roughly $10^{-17}$–$10^{-16}M_{\rm pl}$, about $10^1$–$10^2$ GeV. In the inflaton-decay branch, where the potential is nearly quadratic, the paper obtains $2.59\times10^{-8}\le m_Y/M_{\rm pl}\ll10^{-6}$, i.e., around $10^{11}$ GeV, both for instantaneous decay and for the delayed decay it re-derives with a corrected reheating temperature $T_{\rm reh}\simeq1.22\times10^{-25}(M_{\rm pl}/m_Y)^2M_{\rm pl}$.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical bounds all trace back to the production efficiency $\Theta_A \simeq 2.26 (m_A/M_{\rm pl})^{5/2}$, which presumes a conformally coupled scalar much lighter than $H_{\rm END}$ and fixes $H_{\rm END}$ at $10^{-6}M_{\rm pl}$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In gravitational reheating with a stiff post-inflationary phase (quintessential inflation), the dark matter mass is confined below $10^{-13}M_{\rm pl}$, with the delayed-domination subcase in the $10^1$–$10^2$ GeV range.
  • In reheating by inflaton decay from a near-quadratic potential, the dark matter mass must be around $10^{11}$ GeV; the instantaneous and delayed decay treatments give the same order of magnitude.
  • The reheating temperature and the dark matter mass determine each other through inverse-square relations ($T_{\rm reh}\propto m_Y^{-2}$), so measuring one fixes the other within the model.
  • The allowed mass windows are selected entirely by the BBN lower bound and the gravitino upper bound on reheating temperature, not by any particle physics coupling.
  • The corrected delayed-decay reheating temperature ($T_{\rm reh}\simeq1.22\times10^{-25}(M_{\rm pl}/m_Y)^2M_{\rm pl}$) differs by less than an order of magnitude from earlier values, so previous constraints on the model remain roughly unchanged.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A detection of dark matter with mass between the two windows would falsify the minimal conformally coupled scalar picture, independent of the reheating assumption.
  • Repeating the efficiency calculation for fermions, vectors, or non-conformally coupled scalars should shift the windows, so the inferred mass would become a probe of the dark sector's spin and curvature coupling.
  • A full numerical solution of the two-fluid Boltzmann system could check whether the corrected delayed-decay factor $25/9$ changes the predicted abundance enough to matter for CMB or BBN observables.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This note studies gravitational production of a conformally coupled scalar dark-matter candidate in two reheating scenarios: (i) gravitational reheating through the production and decay of heavy X-particles, and (ii) reheating via direct inflaton decay. In both scenarios the paper relates the dark-matter mass to the reheating temperature and, using the observed abundance Omega_Y h^2 = 0.12 together with BBN and gravitino bounds on the reheating temperature, quotes allowed mass windows: roughly sub-TeV for quintessential inflation (Eq. 34) and around 10^11 GeV for inflaton decay with a quadratic minimum (Eq. 58). A delayed-decay analysis is also presented, leading to a corrected reheating temperature (Eq. 81) that is the same order as the instantaneous-decay result.

Significance. If the imported production efficiencies (Eq. 24 and Eq. 55) are correct, the note provides a compact and useful mapping between reheating dynamics and viable dark-matter masses, with explicit falsifiable mass windows. The delayed-decay calculation in Section IV A is a genuine improvement: it treats the coupled Boltzmann system with an exponential decay factor and is internally consistent, yielding an analytic result that differs by less than an order of magnitude from earlier treatments. The main limitation is that the central mass bounds are rescalings of the imported Eq. (24), so the new results are constraints contingent on that formula rather than independent derivations.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Eq. (24)] The central production efficiency Theta_A = (1/12 pi^3)(m_A/Mpl)^{5/2} sqrt(Mpl/(sqrt(2) H_END)) ~ 2.26 (m_A/Mpl)^{5/2} is imported from the companion paper [26] without derivation. Every mass window in Section III (Eqs. 25, 27, 29, 34, 40, 43, 50, 51) is a rescaling of this formula, and the displayed numerical coefficient 2.26 fixes H_END = 10^{-6} Mpl. The paper does not quantify how the quoted ranges shift if H_END differs from this representative value or if the WKB-in-the-complex-plane approximation loses accuracy. Because this formula is load-bearing, the authors should either reproduce its essential derivation in an appendix or explicitly state the general H_END dependence and the regime of validity.
  2. [Section III, Eqs. (27), (32), and (34)] There is an internal numerical inconsistency in the quintessential-inflation bounds. Setting n = infinity in Eq. (27) gives m_X/Mpl >= 0.7 x 10^{-72/5} ~ 2.8 x 10^{-15}, whereas Eq. (32) states m_X/Mpl >= 5.51 x 10^{-15}, and Eq. (34) inherits the latter through Eq. (30). The intermediate algebra is not shown, so the lower end of the headline sub-TeV dark-matter window is uncertain by nearly a factor of two. Please reconcile the two expressions and display the calculation.
  3. [Section IV, Eqs. (55) and (58)] The production density in Eq. (55) is quoted for m_Y << H_END, but the allowed window in Eq. (58) extends up to m_Y/Mpl ~ 10^{-6}, which is comparable to H_END ~ 10^{-6} Mpl, and the representative value m_Y ~ 10^{-7} Mpl is only an order of magnitude below H_END. The paper should state whether Eq. (55) remains accurate at m_Y/H_END ~ 0.1 and, if not, how the upper part of the quoted mass range is modified.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typographical slips, including 'witha(t)' in the opening paragraph and the duplicated 'the' in the sentence defining rho_r(t) after Eq. (1).
  2. [References] References [8] and [9] appear to be the same paper (identical title and arXiv number) listed twice; one duplicate should be removed or replaced with a distinct citation.
  3. [Section II] The text says 'n is a natural number' but later treats n = infinity for quintessential inflation and uses inequalities for general n; it would help to state explicitly that n may formally be taken to infinity in the kination limit.
  4. [Figures 1 and 2] The figures would benefit from axis labels and a caption explaining the fixed value of H_END used for the numerical curves.
  5. [Section III, Eq. (26)] The notation for the constraint on Theta_X^{n/(2(n-1))} is easy to misread; writing the exponent as a separate factor or using parentheses would improve clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the observed relic abundance is used as a constraint, and the central production-efficiency formula is imported from a same-author derivation with stated assumptions, not from the target mass windows.

full rationale

The derivation chain is non-circular. Section III begins with the observed dark-matter density ΩYh2 = 0.12 and radiation density Ωrh2 and uses them as normalization in Eq. (22), then inverts the production efficiency to obtain viable masses (Eqs. 25, 34, 40, 43, 58). This is constraint-based inference, not a fitted parameter relabeled as a prediction; the paper explicitly reports 'viable dark matter mass values' rather than an independent abundance prediction. The central input Eq. (24), ΘA ≈ 2.26 (mA/Mpl)^{5/2}, is imported from the authors' companion paper [26]; it is load-bearing, but it is a separate WKB derivation for conformally coupled scalars with stated assumptions (mA ≪ H_END, H_END ≈ 10^{-6} Mpl). It does not contain or presuppose the target mass windows or the observed relic abundance, so it is not a self-definitional reduction. The same applies to Eq. (55), attributed to [4,26,40]. The delayed-decay correction in Section IV A is derived in-paper from the Boltzmann equations (59)–(74), producing the finite coefficient 25/9, and Eq. (81) follows algebraically from those equations together with the observed abundance normalization. No equation reduces to another by construction, and no uniqueness claim from the authors' prior work is invoked to force the chosen scenario. Sensitivity to H_END and reliance on the companion derivation are robustness or correctness concerns, not circularity under the rubric.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation rests on the production efficiency formula from the authors' own [26], on the choice H_END ≈ 10^-6 M_pl, and on several modeling assumptions (conformal coupling, φ^{2n} potential, constant decay rates). No new particle or entity is introduced; the X and Y fields are inherited from prior literature. The mass bounds are therefore conditional on these upstream assumptions.

free parameters (5)
  • H_END (Hubble rate at end of inflation) = 10^-6 M_pl (chosen representative value)
    Used in Eq. (24) to fix the numerical coefficient 2.26 and in all numerical bounds (Sections III, IV); no error bars or variation are given.
  • n (power of inflaton potential near minimum) = scanned: n = 3, ..., ∞, and n = 1
    Determines the equation-of-state parameter w_eff = (n-1)/(n+1) and the scaling exponents in all reheating formulas; the paper does not derive n from a specific potential.
  • m_X (heavy X-particle mass) = free, constrained to ranges
    The independent variable in Eqs. (25), (27), (32), (44); the paper derives bounds on m_X rather than a single value.
  • Γ_φ (inflaton decay rate) = model parameter in Section IV
    Appears in Eq. (56) and is related to the dark matter mass via the observed relic abundance; the model does not fix it.
  • g_reh (SM relativistic degrees of freedom) = 106.75
    Used in the Stefan-Boltzmann relation for Treh; standard SM value, not varied.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Flat FLRW background with scale factor a(t) and standard Friedmann evolution
    Stated in the introduction; all density and temperature formulas rely on this geometry.
  • domain assumption X and Y scalar fields are conformally coupled to the Ricci scalar
    Used in Eq. (24) for the production efficiency; the mass bounds change for minimal or non-conformal coupling.
  • domain assumption Inflaton potential behaves as φ^{2n} near its minimum, with constant w_eff = (n-1)/(n+1)
    Basis for the scaling laws (Eqs. 6, 7) and for the requirement n ≥ 3 in gravitational reheating.
  • standard math WKB method in the complex plane gives the Bogoliubov coefficient β and ΘA formula
    Imported from [26] as Eq. (24); validity requires mA ≪ H_END, which the paper states.
  • domain assumption Boltzmann equations with constant decay rates describe reheating
    Used in Eqs. (1) and (59); decay rates are assumed constant and decay starts at the end of inflation.
  • domain assumption BBN lower bound and gravitino upper bound constrain the reheating temperature to 5×10^-22 M_pl ≤ Treh ≤ 5×10^-10 M_pl
    Imported from [36-39] and used to derive all mass ranges (Eqs. 26, 31, 48).
  • domain assumption In delayed decay, Γ_φ ≪ H_END and the background dominates before reheating, permitting the approximate scale factor Eq. (69)
    Used in Section IV A to solve Eq. (66) approximately; the error from this approximation is not quantified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A note on the gravitational dark matter production." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7MIIBIDE

@misc{pith2026241206626,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A note on the gravitational dark matter production},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7MIIBIDE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06626}
}
read the original abstract

Dark matter, one of the fundamental components of the universe, has remained mysterious in modern cosmology and particle physics, and hence, this field is of utmost importance at present moment. One of the foundational questions in this direction is the origin of dark matter which directly links with its creation. In the present article we study the gravitational production of dark matter in two distinct contexts: firstly, when reheating occurs through the gravitational particle production, and secondly, when it is driven by the inflaton's decay. We establish a connection between the reheating temperature and the mass of dark matter, and from the reheating bounds, we determine the range of viable dark matter mass values.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.06626 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The dependence of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The maximum reheating temperature versus the mass of the produced particles, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [26]

    Gravitational reheating and superheavy Dark Mat- ter creation after inflation with non-minimal coupling,

    E. Babichev, D. Gorbunov, S. Ramazanov, and L. Rever- beri, “Gravitational reheating and superheavy Dark Mat- ter creation after inflation with non-minimal coupling,” JCAP 09, 059 (2020), arXiv:2006.02225 [hep-ph]

  2. [12]

    Ω rh2 ∼= 2.47 × 10−5

  3. [1]

    “END”: denotes the end of inflation

  4. [2]

    “0”: denotes the present time

  5. [3]

    “reh”: denotes the reheating time

  6. [4]

    ρA,END: denotes the energy density of the produced A-particles, at the end of inflation

  7. [5]

    ρB,END = 3 M 2 plH 2 END is the energy density of the background at the end of inflation ( Mpl is the re- duced Planck mass), that is, it corresponds to the energy density of the inflaton field

  8. [6]

    ρr corresponds to the energy density of the radia- tion

Show all 75 references
  1. [7]

    Θ A = ρA,END ρB,END is the heating efficiency of the A- particles

  2. [8]

    arXiv:2412.06626v3 [gr-qc] 3 Feb 2025 2

    ¯ΘA = 3Γ2 AM 2 pl ρB,END is the decay efficiency of the A- particles, where Γ A is the decay rate of the A- particles. arXiv:2412.06626v3 [gr-qc] 3 Feb 2025 2

  3. [9]

    Ω rh2: density parameter for radiation (h = H0/100 km/s/Mpc in which H0 is the present day value of the Hubble constant)

  4. [10]

    Concerning the observational constraints on some of the parameters, we have used the following values [24]:

    Ω Ah2: density parameter of the A-particles. Concerning the observational constraints on some of the parameters, we have used the following values [24]:

  5. [11]

    Ω Y h2 = 0 .12 ± 0.0012, where the Y -particles are the candidate for dark matter

  6. [13]

    T0 = 2.7255 ± 0.006K ∼= 2.35 × 10−13 GeV ∼= 9.6 × 10−32Mpl. II. GRA VIT A TIONAL REHEA TING FORMULAS This section provides a detailed review of the results recently obtained in [25, 26] (see also [22, 27–29] to find some of the recent results in the context of gravitational re...

  7. [14]

    Quintessential Inflation In this section we discuss the bounds on the masses of X and Y particles in a special cosmological scenario, namely, Quintessential Inflation [22, 27, 28, 42–57] – a unified cosmological model where after inflation the uni- verse enters in a kination p...

  8. [15]

    The reheating temperature in this case is given by Treh = 90 π2greh 1/4 ¯Θ − 1 8 X Θ 3 4 X p HENDMpl ∼= 5.4 × 10−4 ¯Θ − 1 8 X Θ 3 4 X p HENDMpl

    Quintessential Inflation In the case with n = ∞, the formulas get simplifies as follows. The reheating temperature in this case is given by Treh = 90 π2greh 1/4 ¯Θ − 1 8 X Θ 3 4 X p HENDMpl ∼= 5.4 × 10−4 ¯Θ − 1 8 X Θ 3 4 X p HENDMpl. (45) The relation between different heating...

  9. [16]

    A way of making Europe

    Taking into account that a primitive, which can be obtained integrating by parts, of the integrand is given by: 3 20 1 − e−x/2 5/3 3 + 5e−x/2 , (71) we have ρr(t) ∼= 3 20 ρB,END 3HEND Γφ 2/3 1 − e−tΓφ/2 5/3 × 3 + 5e−tΓφ/2 aEND a(t) 4 . (72) For t > treh the contribution of the...

  10. [17]

    Classical Inflation Field Induced Creation of Superheavy Dark Matter,

    Daniel J. H. Chung, “Classical Inflation Field Induced Creation of Superheavy Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 67, 083514 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/9809489

  11. [18]

    On the Gravitational Production of Superheavy Dark Matter,

    Daniel J. H. Chung, Patrick Crotty, Edward W. Kolb, and Antonio Riotto, “On the Gravitational Production of Superheavy Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 64, 043503 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0104100

  12. [19]

    Dark matter from gravitational particle production at reheating,

    Tommi Markkanen and Sami Nurmi, “Dark matter from gravitational particle production at reheating,” JCAP 02, 008 (2017), arXiv:1512.07288 [astro-ph.CO]

  13. [20]

    Pro- duction of Purely Gravitational Dark Matter,

    Yohei Ema, Kazunori Nakayama, and Yong Tang, “Pro- duction of Purely Gravitational Dark Matter,” JHEP09, 135 (2018), arXiv:1804.07471 [hep-ph]

  14. [21]

    Pro- duction of purely gravitational dark matter: the case of fermion and vector boson,

    Yohei Ema, Kazunori Nakayama, and Yong Tang, “Pro- duction of purely gravitational dark matter: the case of fermion and vector boson,” JHEP 07, 060 (2019), arXiv:1903.10973 [hep-ph]

  15. [22]

    Gravitational production of dark matter in the Peebles–Vilenkin model,

    Jaume Haro, “Gravitational production of dark matter in the Peebles–Vilenkin model,” Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 257 (2020), arXiv:1904.02393 [gr-qc]

  16. [23]

    Gravitational production of superheavy baryonic and dark matter in quintessential inflation: nonconformally coupled case,

    Jaume Haro and Llibert Arest´ e Sal´ o, “Gravitational production of superheavy baryonic and dark matter in quintessential inflation: nonconformally coupled case,” Phys. Rev. D 100, 043519 (2019), arXiv:1906.02548 [gr- qc]

  17. [25]

    Gravitational production of scalar dark matter ,

    Jose A. R. Cembranos, Luis J. Garay, Yann Mam- brini, and Jose M. S´ anchez Vel´ azquez, “ Gravitational production of scalar dark matter ,” JHEP 06 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06, arXiv:1910.13937 [hep-ph]

  18. [27]

    Gravitational dark matter production in Palatini pre- heating,

    Alexandros Karam, Martti Raidal, and Eemeli Tomberg, “Gravitational dark matter production in Palatini pre- heating,” JCAP 03, 064 (2021), arXiv:2007.03484 [astro- ph.CO]

  19. [28]

    Gravitational Pro- duction of Dark Matter during Reheating,

    Yann Mambrini and Keith A. Olive, “Gravitational Pro- duction of Dark Matter during Reheating,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 115009 (2021), arXiv:2102.06214 [hep-ph]

  20. [29]

    Gravitational dark matter production: primordial black holes and UV freeze-in,

    Nicol´ as Bernal and ´Oscar Zapata, “Gravitational dark matter production: primordial black holes and UV freeze-in,” Phys. Lett. B 815, 136129 (2021), arXiv:2011.02510 [hep-ph]

  21. [30]

    Scalar dark matter production from preheating and structure formation constraints,

    Marcos A. G. Garcia, Mathias Pierre, and Sarunas Verner, “Scalar dark matter production from preheating and structure formation constraints,” Phys. Rev. D 107, 043530 (2023), arXiv:2206.08940 [hep-ph]

  22. [31]

    Super heavy dark matter from inflationary Schwinger production,

    Mar Bastero-Gil, Paulo B. Ferraz, Lorenzo Ubaldi, and Roberto Vega-Morales, “Super heavy dark matter from inflationary Schwinger production,” Phys. Rev. D 110, 095019 (2024), arXiv:2311.09475 [hep-ph]

  23. [32]

    Gravitational dark matter from minimal preheating,

    Ruopeng Zhang and Sibo Zheng, “Gravitational dark matter from minimal preheating,” JHEP 02, 061 (2024), arXiv:2311.14273 [hep-ph]

  24. [33]

    Testing ax- ionic dark matter during gravitational reheating,

    Basabendu Barman and Arghyajit Datta, “Testing ax- ionic dark matter during gravitational reheating,” Phys. Rev. D 109, 095029 (2024), arXiv:2312.13821 [hep-ph]

  25. [34]

    Schwinger dark matter produc- tion,

    Mar Bastero-Gil, Paulo B. Ferraz, Lorenzo Ubaldi, and Roberto Vega-Morales, “Schwinger dark matter produc- tion,” JCAP 10, 078 (2024), arXiv:2312.15137 [hep-ph]

  26. [35]

    Production of ul- tralight dark matter from inflationary spectator fields,

    Alessio Belfiglio and Orlando Luongo, “Production of ul- tralight dark matter from inflationary spectator fields,” 10 Phys. Rev. D 110, 023541 (2024), arXiv:2401.16910 [hep- th]

  27. [36]

    Gravitationally produced dark matter and primordial black holes,

    Enrico Bertuzzo, Yuber F. Perez-Gonzalez, Gabriel M. Salla, and Renata Zukanovich Funchal, “Gravitationally produced dark matter and primordial black holes,” JCAP 09, 059 (2024), arXiv:2405.17611 [hep-ph]

  28. [37]

    Gravitational Dark Matter Production in Supergravity α-Attractor Infla- tion,

    Chenhuan Wang and Wenbin Zhao, “Gravitational Dark Matter Production in Supergravity α-Attractor Infla- tion,” (2024), arXiv:2411.15030 [hep-ph]

  29. [38]

    Gravitational reheating through conformally coupled superheavy scalar particles,

    Soichiro Hashiba and Jun’ichi Yokoyama, “Gravitational reheating through conformally coupled superheavy scalar particles,” JCAP 01, 028 (2019), arXiv:1809.05410 [gr- qc]

  30. [39]

    Inflaton Oscillations and Post-Inflationary Reheating,

    Marcos A. G. Garcia, Kunio Kaneta, Yann Mam- brini, and Keith A. Olive, “Inflaton Oscillations and Post-Inflationary Reheating,” JCAP 04, 012 (2021), arXiv:2012.10756 [hep-ph]

  31. [40]

    The Cosmological Parameters (2021),

    Ofer Lahav and Andrew R. Liddle, “The Cosmological Parameters (2021),” (2022), arXiv:2201.08666 [astro- ph.CO]

  32. [41]

    Gravitational reheating formulas and bounds in oscillat- ing backgrounds

    Jaume de Haro, Llibert Arest´ e Sal´ o, and Supriya Pan, “ Gravitational reheating formulas and bounds in oscillat- ing backgrounds.” arXiv:2411.01671 [gr-qc]

  33. [42]

    Gravitational reheat- ing formulas and bounds in oscillating backgrounds II: Constraints on the spectral index and gravitational dark matter production

    Jaume de Haro and Supriya Pan, “Gravitational reheat- ing formulas and bounds in oscillating backgrounds II: Constraints on the spectral index and gravitational dark matter production.” arXiv:2411.06190 [astro-ph]

  34. [43]

    Gravitational re- heating in quintessential inflation,

    E. J. Chun, S. Scopel, and I. Zaballa, “Gravitational re- heating in quintessential inflation,” JCAP07, 022 (2009), arXiv:0904.0675 [hep-ph]

  35. [44]

    Analytic formula to calculate the reheating temperature via gravitational particle production in smooth nonoscillat- ing backgrounds,

    Jaume de Haro and Llibert Arest´ e Sal´ o, “Analytic formula to calculate the reheating temperature via gravitational particle production in smooth nonoscillat- ing backgrounds,” Phys. Rev. D 107, 063542 (2023), arXiv:2212.01276 [gr-qc]

  36. [45]

    Radiative Production of Non-thermal Dark Matter ,

    Kunio Kaneta, Yann Mambrini, and Keith A. Olive, “ Radiative Production of Non-thermal Dark Matter ,” Phys. Rev. D 99, 063508 (2019), arXiv:1901.04449 [hep- ph]

  37. [46]

    A. A. Grib, S. G. Mamayev, and V. M. Mostepanenko, Vacuum quantum effects in strong fields (Friedmann Lab- oratory Publishing, St.Petersburg, 1994)

  38. [47]

    Parker and D

    Leonard E. Parker and D. Toms, Quantum Field The- ory in Curved Spacetime: Quantized Field and Gravity , Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cam- bridge University Press, 2009)

  39. [48]

    Hyperbolic Inflation,

    Adam R. Brown, “Hyperbolic Inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 251601 (2018), arXiv:1705.03023 [hep-th]

  40. [49]

    Su- perconformal Inflationary α-Attractors ,

    Renata Kallos, Andrei Linde, and Diederik Roest, “ Su- perconformal Inflationary α-Attractors ,” JHEP 11, 198 (2013), arXiv:1311.0472 [hep-th]

  41. [50]

    Non-minimal Inflationary Attractors ,

    Renata Kallos and Andrei Linde, “ Non-minimal Inflationary Attractors ,” JCAP 10, 033 (2013), arXiv:1307.7938 [hep-th]

  42. [51]

    In- flation and preheating in NO models,

    Gary N. Felder, Lev Kofman, and Andrei D. Linde, “In- flation and preheating in NO models,” Phys. Rev. D 60, 103505 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9903350

  43. [52]

    Inflation Can Save the Gravitino,

    John R. Ellis, Andrei D. Linde, and Dimitri V. Nanopou- los, “Inflation Can Save the Gravitino,” Phys. Lett. B 118, 59–64 (1982)

  44. [53]

    Is It Easy to Save the Gravitino?

    M. Yu. Khlopov and Andrei D. Linde, “Is It Easy to Save the Gravitino?” Phys. Lett. B 138, 265–268 (1984)

  45. [54]

    Big-Bang nucleosynthesis and hadronic decay of long- lived massive particles,

    Masahiro Kawasaki, Kazunori Kohri, and Takeo Moroi, “Big-Bang nucleosynthesis and hadronic decay of long- lived massive particles,” Phys. Rev. D 71, 083502 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0408426

  46. [55]

    Revisiting Big-Bang Nucleosynthe- sis Constraints on Long-Lived Decaying Particles,

    Masahiro Kawasaki, Kazunori Kohri, Takeo Moroi, and Yoshitaro Takaesu, “Revisiting Big-Bang Nucleosynthe- sis Constraints on Long-Lived Decaying Particles,” Phys. Rev. D 97, 023502 (2018), arXiv:1709.01211 [hep-ph]

  47. [56]

    Cosmological gravitational particle production and its implications for cosmological relics,

    Edward W. Kolb and Andrew J. Long, “Cosmological gravitational particle production and its implications for cosmological relics,” 2312.09042 (2023)

  48. [57]

    Gravitational Particle Production of Scalars: Analytic and Numerical Approaches Including Early Reheating,

    Leah Jenks, Edward W. Kolb, and Keyer Thyme, “Gravitational Particle Production of Scalars: Analytic and Numerical Approaches Including Early Reheating,” (2024), arXiv:2410.03938 [hep-ph]

  49. [58]

    Quintessential in- flation,

    P. J. E. Peebles and A. Vilenkin, “Quintessential in- flation,” Phys. Rev. D 59, 063505 (1999), arXiv:astro- ph/9810509

  50. [59]

    Production and detection of relic gravitons in quintessential inflationary models,

    Massimo Giovannini, “Production and detection of relic gravitons in quintessential inflationary models,” Phys. Rev. D 60, 123511 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9903004

  51. [60]

    Modeling quintessential inflation,

    Konstantinos Dimopoulos and J. W. F. Valle, “Modeling quintessential inflation,” Astropart. Phys. 18, 287–306 (2002), arXiv:astro-ph/0111417

  52. [61]

    Low scale quintessential infla- tion,

    Massimo Giovannini, “Low scale quintessential infla- tion,” Phys. Rev. D 67, 123512 (2003), arXiv:hep- ph/0301264

  53. [62]

    Quintessential inflation on the brane and the relic gravity wave background,

    M. Sami and V. Sahni, “Quintessential inflation on the brane and the relic gravity wave background,” Phys. Rev. D 70, 083513 (2004), arXiv:hep-th/0402086

  54. [63]

    A Simple model for quintessential inflation,

    Rogerio Rosenfeld and J. A. Frieman, “A Simple model for quintessential inflation,” JCAP 09, 003 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0504191

  55. [64]

    A simple quintessential inflation model,

    M. C. Bento, R. Gonzalez Felipe, and N. M. C. Santos, “A simple quintessential inflation model,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 24, 1639–1642 (2009)

  56. [65]

    Gravitational Particle Creation in a Stiff Matter Dominated Universe,

    Juho Lankinen and Iiro Vilja, “Gravitational Particle Creation in a Stiff Matter Dominated Universe,” JCAP 08, 025 (2017), arXiv:1612.02586 [gr-qc]

  57. [66]

    Reheating con- straints in quintessential inflation,

    Jaume De Haro and Llibert Arest´ e Sal´ o, “Reheating con- straints in quintessential inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 95, 123501 (2017), arXiv:1702.04212 [gr-qc]

  58. [67]

    Quintessential inflation at low reheating temperatures,

    Llibert Arest´ e Sal´ o and Jaume de Haro, “Quintessential inflation at low reheating temperatures,” Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 798 (2017), arXiv:1707.02810 [gr-qc]

  59. [68]

    Re- heating in quintessential inflation via gravitational pro- duction of heavy massive particles: A detailed analysis,

    Jaume Haro, Weiqiang Yang, and Supriya Pan, “Re- heating in quintessential inflation via gravitational pro- duction of heavy massive particles: A detailed analysis,” JCAP 01, 023 (2019), arXiv:1811.07371 [gr-qc]

  60. [69]

    Understanding gravitational particle production in quintessential inflation,

    Jaume de Haro, Supriya Pan, and Llibert Arest´ e Sal´ o, “Understanding gravitational particle production in quintessential inflation,” JCAP 06, 056 (2019), arXiv:1903.01181 [gr-qc]

  61. [70]

    Palatini R 2 quintessential inflation,

    Konstantinos Dimopoulos, Alexandros Karam, Samuel S´ anchez L´ opez, and Eemeli Tomberg, “Palatini R 2 quintessential inflation,” JCAP 10, 076 (2022), arXiv:2206.14117 [gr-qc]

  62. [71]

    Reheating formulas in quintessential in- flation via gravitational particle production,

    Jaume de Haro, “Reheating formulas in quintessential in- flation via gravitational particle production,” Phys. Rev. D 109, 023517 (2024), arXiv:2310.02245 [gr-qc]

  63. [72]

    Quintessen- tial Inflation in Logarithmic Cartan F (R) Gravity,

    Tomohiro Inagaki and Masahiko Taniguchi, “Quintessen- tial Inflation in Logarithmic Cartan F (R) Gravity,” 2312.11776 (2023)

  64. [73]

    Testing α-attractor quintessen- tial inflation against CMB and low-redshift data,

    William Giar` e, Eleonora Di Valentino, Eric V. Linder, and Enrico Specogna, “Testing α-attractor quintessen- tial inflation against CMB and low-redshift data,” 11 2402.01560 (2024)

  65. [74]

    Towards the theory of reheating after infla- tion,

    Lev Kofman, Andrei D. Linde, and Alexei A. Starobin- sky, “Towards the theory of reheating after infla- tion,” Phys. Rev. D 56, 3258–3295 (1997), arXiv:hep- ph/9704452

  66. [75]

    Reheating and Post-inflationary Production of Dark Matter,

    Marcos A. G. Garcia, Kunio Kaneta, Yann Mambrini, and Keith A. Olive, “Reheating and Post-inflationary Production of Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 123507 (2020), arXiv:2004.08404 [hep-ph]

  67. [76]

    Largest temperature of the radiation era and its cosmological implications ,

    Gian Francesco Giudice, Edward W. Kolb, and Antonio Riotto, “Largest temperature of the radiation era and its cosmological implications ,” Phys. Rev. D 64, 023508 (2001), arXiv:0005123 [hep-ph]

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.