Kinetic Gauge Friction in Natural Inflation

Diederik Roest; Ema Dimastrogiovanni; Martino Michelotti; Matteo Fasiello; Rodrigo Gonzalez Quaglia

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 110 references

Kinetic Gauge Friction in Natural Inflation

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Coupling the inflaton's kinetic term to a non-Abelian gauge field adds enough friction to keep natural inflation going for 60+ e-folds with a sub-Planckian axion decay constant, and a Chern-Simons term repairs the instability this creates.

desk verdict A genuinely new friction mechanism for natural inflation with sub-Planckian f, but the quoted CMB observables ride on an unevaluated backreaction assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.19892 v1 pith:CSAFPICG submitted 2024-11-29 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-phhep-th

Martino Michelotti , Rodrigo Gonzalez Quaglia , Ema Dimastrogiovanni , Matteo Fasiello , Diederik Roest This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.COgr-qchep-phhep-th PACS 98.80.Cq

keywords naturalinflationkineticgaugefrictionchromo-naturalaxionnon-Abelianfieldscosmologicalperturbationschiralgravitationalwavessub-Planckiandecayconstant

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 proposes a new friction mechanism for natural inflation: a dimension-eight, parity-even coupling between the axion-inflaton kinetic term and the field strength of a non-Abelian SU(2) gauge sector. The authors show that this 'kinetic gauge friction' slows the rolling of the axion enough to produce sixty or more e-folds of accelerated expansion without requiring a trans-Planckian decay constant $f$, which is the usual cure for natural inflation's tension with CMB data. A linear perturbation analysis finds that the gauge-field tensor modes acquire a negative sound speed, an instability; adding a Chern-Simons coupling between axion and gauge fields flips the sound speed positive. For a fiducial parameter set, numerical evolution of scalar and tensor perturbations yields $A_s = 2\times10^{-9}$, $n_s=0.96$, and $r=4.6\times10^{-3}$, consistent with current CMB bounds, and the gravitational-wave signal is predicted to be chiral. The main caveat, left for future work, is that backreaction of the enhanced gauge modes on the background is neglected.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the effective friction term $9g^2\lambda_1 Q^4 H\dot\chi$ that appears in the axion equation of motion once the gauge field acquires an isotropic vacuum expectation value $A^a_i = a(t)Q(t)\delta^a_i$. In slow roll the gauge-field equation drives $\dot\chi\to 1/\sqrt{\lambda_1}$, so the friction does not depend on the slope of the potential; the Chern-Simons term $\lambda\chi F\tilde F/(8f)$ is then the stabilizer that renders the tensor sound speed $c_t^2 = 1-\lambda_1\dot\chi^2$ positive. The analytical tractability comes from an attractor solution in which $Q$ is set by the potential slope and $\Delta N_{\max}$ by $\lambda_1 f\mu^2$, plus a Whittaker-function solution for the enhanced right-handed gauge polarization that seeds chiral gravitational waves.

What would settle it

Evaluate the backreaction integrals in Appendix C on the fiducial background: if $\rho_t / (3M_{\rm Pl}^2 H^2)$, $T^\chi_{BQ}/(3H\dot\chi)$, or $T^Q_{BQ}/(H\dot Q)$ reach order unity at or before the CMB-mode horizon crossing (sixty e-folds before the end), the linear-spectra claim is decisively invalidated. Alternatively, a future measurement that places the CMB-scale tensor-to-scalar ratio below $r\simeq 4.6\times10^{-3}$ with $n_s$ held at $0.96$ would falsify the fiducial prediction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Natural inflation's axion decay constant must be super-Planckian for the simplest cosine potential to fit observations, but typical string-theoretic axions have $f<M_{\rm Pl}$. The paper's central claim is that adding the non-minimal kinetic coupling $\lambda_1 F^{a\mu}{}_{\alpha}F^{a\alpha}{}_{\nu}\,\partial_\mu\chi\partial^\nu\chi$ (together with $\lambda_2=\lambda_1/2$) lets the non-Abelian gauge field act as a friction reservoir: in the slow-roll regime the axion velocity is driven to $\dot\chi\simeq 1/\sqrt{\lambda_1}$, independent of the potential slope, and the duration of inflation can exceed sixty e-folds for sub-Planckian $f$ whenever $\lambda_1\gtrsim 10^{15}M_{\rm Pl}^{-4}$. The same coupling makes the tensor sound speed negative, $c_t^2\simeq -H^2/(g^2Q^2)$; introducing the Chern-Simons operator $\chi F\tilde F/(8f)$ cures this, giving a positive $c_t^2$ provided $\lambda\gtrsim 6f\sqrt{\lambda_1}H^2/(gQ)$. With the fiducial parameters $g=0.5$, $\lambda_1=(10^4\,M_{\rm Pl}^{-1})^4$, $\mu=2.2\times10^{-3}M_{\rm Pl}$, $f=0.24M_{\rm Pl}$, $\lambda=30$, the curvature and tensor spectra match $A_s=2\times10^{-9}$, $n_s=0.96$, $r=4.6\times10^{-3}$. The paper calls this setup kinetic gauge friction chromo-natural (KFC) inflation.

Load-bearing premise

The predictive calculation assumes that the exponentially enhanced gauge-field fluctuations do not backreact on the background; if their energy density or the friction terms they produce in the axion and gauge equations become comparable to the background terms at CMB scales, the computed spectra would change, and the paper explicitly defers this backreaction check to future work (Appendix C).

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Sub-Planckian axion decay constants are enough for natural inflation: with $\lambda_1\gtrsim 10^{15}M_{\rm Pl}^{-4}$, the model can sustain $\Delta N_{\max}\ge 60$ e-folds.
The combination of kinetic gauge friction and a Chern-Simons term yields observationally viable spectra, with $A_s=2\times10^{-9}$, $n_s=0.96$, and $r=4.6\times10^{-3}$ for the fiducial parameters, within $2\sigma$ of current CMB bounds.
The sourced gravitational-wave background is chiral: the right-handed gauge polarization is exponentially enhanced, $|T_R|\propto c_t^{-1/2}\exp[\pi(c_t^{-1}\xi+c_t m_Q)/2]$, so a positive detection of net circular polarization in the GW background would be a distinctive signature.
The scalar vacuum is not the standard Bunch-Davies one: the early-time mode system is non-diagonal and requires a generalized Wronskian condition to set initial conditions.
The Chern-Simons coupling's effect on the background remains subdominant for $\lambda \ll f g \lambda_1 Q \dot\chi$, so the kinetic friction continues to drive the dynamics while the CS term only stabilizes perturbations.

Reading between the lines

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

If backreaction of the enhanced gauge modes turns out to be mild at CMB scales, the KFC construction provides a template for coupling inflaton kinetic terms to any gauge sector; the same dimension-eight operator could be used in spectator-axion or reheating scenarios, where the friction would act without altering the potential.
The positive-sound-speed condition $\lambda\gtrsim 6f\sqrt{\lambda_1}H^2/(gQ)$ is likely to sharpen into a lower bound on the Chern-Simons coupling that is also a perturbativity constraint; one could test whether the required coupling remains within the EFT regime across the full range of $f$ and $\lambda_1$ that gives 60 e-folds.
A concrete numerical check of the Appendix C integrals (computing $\rho_t$, $T^\chi_{BQ}$, $T^Q_{BQ}$ on the fiducial background) would determine whether strong backreaction sets in before or after CMB scales; that is the natural next calculation and would decide how much of the shown parameter space survives.
The chiral gravitational-wave prediction connects this model to pulsar-timing-array and interferometer searches; if the strong-backreaction regime is reached on small scales, the resulting localized GW bursts could be distinguishable from the scale-dependent chirality of Abelian axion-gauge models.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: this is a real new mechanism, not a repackaging. The kinetic coupling of the axion kinetic term to the SU(2) field strength in Eq. (3.1) gives a friction that supports 60+ e-folds with f=0.24 M_Pl, and the paper shows cleanly that the negative gauge-tensor sound speed is cured by a Chern-Simons term. The analytic slow-roll background solution and the numerical confirmation are convincing. The perturbation treatment is also serious: the multifield scalar vacuum is not Bunch-Davies, and the generalized Wronskian construction is handled carefully. Setting G=0 recovers CNI, which is the right sanity check. Credit where due: the instability/cure result and the background mechanism are the core contributions and they hold up.

The soft spot is exactly the one flagged in the stress test. The enhanced right-handed tensor mode grows like Eq. (4.33), with exponent O(10) at the fiducial point (c_t ~ 0.04, xi ~ 0.2, m_Q ~ 100). The background equations (4.13)-(4.14) omit the backreaction terms defined in Appendix C, and the paper explicitly defers evaluating them. Since the integrals in (C.2) run over all k and m_Q grows toward small scales, the CMB-scale smallness of a single mode is not enough to guarantee that the integrated backreaction is small. So the headline numbers As=2e-9, ns=0.96, r=4.6e-3 are predictions of the no-backreaction background, not demonstrated predictions of the full model. The authors are honest about this, but it means the phenomenological section is conditional. I would not call the paper wrong; I would call the observables preliminary.

Two smaller things. First, the scalar sector neglects metric perturbations with a citation to similar models; that is probably fine, but a short explicit check would tighten it. Second, at the fiducial background the kinetic-coupling term is not a small correction: 1+3g^2 lambda1 Q^4 is around 10^3, so calling it "next-to-leading order" needs a comment on EFT/strong-coupling validity.

Bottom line: the paper deserves a serious referee. The new friction mechanism and the CS cure are solid; the observables need either backreaction estimates or an explicit reframing as linear-order results. The citation pattern looks appropriate. I would bring it to reading group and would cite it if I worked on axion-gauge inflation.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces kinetic gauge friction into natural inflation by coupling the axion-inflaton kinetic term to a non-Abelian SU(2) gauge field strength, and adds a Chern-Simons coupling to stabilize the perturbations. On the background, the authors derive slow-roll analytic solutions and show numerically that the model can produce more than sixty e-folds with sub-Planckian f. The perturbation analysis includes tensor and scalar sectors, with a non-standard vacuum constructed through generalized Wronskian conditions. For a fiducial parameter set, the paper reports As = 2e-9, ns = 0.96, and r = 4.6e-3, and concludes that the model is compatible with current CMB bounds. The paper explicitly defers a full backreaction analysis to future work, stating this limitation in Section 6 and Appendix C.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the model provides a new friction mechanism for natural inflation, with an explicit demonstration that a Chern-Simons term can cure the negative sound-speed instability of the kinetic gauge coupling. The analytic background solutions, the stability conditions in Eqs. (5.23) and (5.24), the generalized Wronskian quantization, and the numerical mode evolution are concrete and reproducible elements that make this a useful contribution to the axion-gauge-inflation literature. The main caveat is that the headline CMB observables are computed without quantifying the backreaction of the exponentially enhanced gauge mode, so the observational claim is conditional. If the authors can supply a credible estimate of the backreaction integrals, the paper would constitute a solid proof-of-principle; otherwise, the quoted spectra should be presented as exploratory rather than as robust model predictions.

major comments (3)

[Appendix C and Sec. 5.4] The quoted observable predictions (As = 2e-9, ns = 0.96, r = 4.6e-3) are obtained on the no-backreaction background and with linear mode equations that treat the enhanced gauge mode as a spectator. Equation (4.33) gives |T_R| proportional to c_t^{-1/2} exp[(pi/2)(c_t^{-1} xi + c_t m_Q)]; with the fiducial parameters in Eq. (4.19), c_t is of order 0.04, xi of order 0.2, and m_Q of order 10^2, so the amplification exponent is of order 10. The backreaction integrals in Eqs. (C.2) are not evaluated, and because they integrate over all k while m_Q grows toward smaller scales, the smallness of a CMB-scale mode does not by itself bound the integrated backreaction. I request an order-of-magnitude estimate of rho_t/(3 M_Pl^2 H^2), |T_BQ^chi / V_chi|, and |T_BQ^Q / (2 g^2 Q^3)| over the last 60 e-folds, or an explicit restriction to a parameter regime where these ratios are parametrically small. Until this is provided, the numbers in Sec. 5.4 should be presented as conditional on the no-backreaction approximation.
[Sec. 4.4 and Sec. 5.4] The tensor power spectrum is split in Eq. (4.34) into vacuum and sourced contributions, but the two components are never separately defined or reported. Since the paper's key phenomenological signature is a chiral, sourced gravitational-wave signal, the reader cannot tell from the text whether the reported r = 4.6e-3 is dominated by the vacuum or the sourced piece, nor how the chirality is distributed across scales. Please define the decomposition explicitly and show the separate amplitudes of the L and R polarizations at the CMB scale.
[Sec. 5.1 and Sec. 5.3] The non-Bunch-Davies initial conditions are an important element of the scalar-sector analysis, but the paper does not state the numerical value of x_in used in Eqs. (4.27) and (5.27), nor does it report a convergence check in x_in. Because the asymptotic solution in Eq. (5.25) assumes the matrix N in Eq. (5.19) is constant in the infinite past, the choice of the starting time and the sensitivity of ns and r to that choice should be specified explicitly.

minor comments (4)

[Sec. 3.2] Equation (3.16) has a dimensional mismatch as printed: the term 4 sqrt(6) lambda_1 f mu^2 cannot be added to 3 M_Pl Delta N. Presumably the term should contain sqrt(lambda_1). Please correct the formula and confirm that the analytic curve in Fig. 4 was generated with the corrected expression.
[Sec. 5.4] The phrase 'compatible with current CMB bounds' should be qualified: the fiducial parameters are hand-selected to satisfy the theoretical requirements and to give As in the observed range, rather than chosen by a fit. This is a legitimate consistency check, but the text should state explicitly that no likelihood or parameter-space scan is being claimed.
[Abstract and figures] There are several typographical and formatting issues, including 'sixtye-folds' in the abstract, the axis label '104M^{-1}Pl Q' in several figures, and the mixed use of 'e-folds' and 'e-folds'; these should be cleaned up before publication.
[Sec. 5.3] The statement that Eq. (5.33) is equivalent to the full expression for zeta on super-horizon scales is only described verbally; please include a quantitative comparison or specify the threshold in Delta N used for the equivalence.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No meaningful circularity: the model's 60 e-fold condition, stability bounds, and sound-speed cure are derived from its own equations, and the quoted CMB observables are a consistency check on a hand-picked fiducial point rather than a fit renamed as a prediction. The explicit deferral of backreaction in Appendix C is a robustness caveat, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain. The background friction and the 60 e-fold condition follow from integrating the slow-roll equations (Eqs. (3.7)-(3.19)) for the new kinetic-gauge coupling, and the fiducial parameters in Eq. (4.19) are then chosen to satisfy that derived condition, plus sub-Planckian f, weak coupling g<1, and the stability bounds in Eqs. (4.18) and (5.24). Choosing parameters to satisfy derived requirements and then checking the resulting As, ns, and r against CMB bounds is a standard consistency check, not a fitted input called a prediction: the spectral tilt and tensor ratio are not the inputs of the search, and the paper does not fit to the CMB data. The negative sound speed and its cure by the Chern-Simons term are derived from the perturbation equations (Eqs. (4.9)-(4.17)) rather than imposed. The scalar initial conditions are fixed by the generalized Wronskian conditions re-derived in Sec. 5.1. Citations to works with overlapping authors ([62], [65], [67]) are used only for standard techniques and context—stability criteria, Wronskian conditions, and backreaction-estimate references—and none is load-bearing for the paper's central claim. The paper explicitly flags in Sec. 5.4 and Appendix C that backreaction of the enhanced TR mode is neglected and left to future work; the quoted linearized spectra are therefore conditional on that approximation. That is a correctness/robustness caveat, not a circular reduction of outputs to inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on the slow-roll attractor solution (Eq 3.8-3.15), the stability assumptions of the SU(2) VEV, the neglect of metric scalar perturbations, the constancy of the infinite-past coefficients, and the unstated validity of the EFT and of linear perturbation theory without backreaction. The five free parameters are chosen by hand to satisfy theoretical and observational constraints.

free parameters (5)

g (gauge self-coupling) = 0.5
Chosen to be in the weak coupling regime (g<1), as stated in Sec 5.4.
lambda1 (kinetic gauge coupling) = 10^16 M_Pl^{-4}
Chosen so that the analytic estimate Eq (3.19) gives at least 60 e-folds for sub-Planckian f; see Fig 3 and Sec 5.4.
lambda (Chern-Simons coupling) = 30
Chosen to satisfy the scalar stability bound lambda > 6f sqrt(lambda1) H^2/(gQ), Eq (5.24), while keeping the CS effect sub-leading on the background.
mu (potential scale) = 2.2e-3 M_Pl
Chosen so that the scalar amplitude As reproduces the observed value ~2e-9; see Sec 5.4.
f (axion decay constant) = 0.24 M_Pl
Chosen sub-Planckian, the target regime of the paper; values are scanned in Fig 3.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Slow-roll regime with Qdot << HQ and H << gQ holds throughout the relevant evolution.
Used in Sec 3.2 to derive the analytic background solutions Eqs (3.8)-(3.15) and to avoid the known gQ > sqrt(2) H instability cited from [62].
domain assumption The isotropic SU(2) gauge VEV is an attractor and vector perturbations decay.
Invoked in Sec 4 (intro) and Sec 5, citing [102,103] and [64]; the analysis restricts to the isotropic solution.
domain assumption Scalar metric perturbations can be neglected in the scalar sector.
Used in Sec 5, citing [62] that this is valid in axion-inflation models; no explicit check is given for the new kinetic coupling.
domain assumption The coefficients in the infinite-past perturbation system are constant when setting initial conditions.
Stated in Sec 5.2, footnote 10: 'here we are assuming all the components of N to be constant in the infinite past.' This underlies the eigenvalue solution Eq (5.20).
domain assumption The effective field theory expansion in the dimension-8 operator remains valid when lambda1 chi_dot^2 is O(1).
The background solution gives chi_dot ~ 1/sqrt(lambda1) (Eq 3.9), so c_t^2 = 1 - lambda1 chi_dot^2 is near zero (Eq 4.9). The paper does not check the strong-coupling scale of the EFT; this is an unflagged assumption.
domain assumption Backreaction of enhanced gauge modes on the background is negligible at the scales used for CMB observables.
The paper computes linear perturbations without backreaction sources, and Appendix C explicitly defers the strong backreaction analysis to future work.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Kinetic Gauge Friction in Natural Inflation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CSAFPICG

@misc{pith2026241119892,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Kinetic Gauge Friction in Natural Inflation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CSAFPICG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.19892}
}

abstract

We study an extension of the natural inflation model comprising a non-Abelian gauge sector coupled to the axion-inflaton kinetic term. We show how such non-minimal coupling serves as a source of friction for the rolling inflaton granting sixty or more $e$-folds of accelerated expansion for sub-Planckian values of the axion decay constant. The analysis of perturbations reveals a negative sound speed, thus signaling an instability. Implementing a Chern-Simons-type coupling between the inflaton and gauge sectors cures the instability by delivering a positive speed. We perform a numerical study of scalar and tensor perturbations for a fiducial set of parameters finding that the corresponding observables are compatible with current CMB bounds.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

110 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

[1]

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

1981
[2]

A. D. Linde, The Inflationary Universe, Rept. Prog. Phys.47 (1984) 925

1984
[3]

D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto, Particle physics models of inflation and the cosmological density perturbation, Phys. Rept. 314 (1999) 1 [ hep-ph/9807278]

arXiv 1999
[4]

Martin, C

J. Martin, C. Ringeval and V. Vennin, Encyclopædia Inflationaris, Phys. Dark Univ.5-6 (2014) 75 [ 1303.3787]

arXiv 2014
[5]

A. D. Linde, Chaotic Inflation, Phys. Lett. B129 (1983) 177

1983
[6]

A. D. Linde, Hybrid inflation, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 748 [ astro-ph/9307002]

arXiv 1994
[7]

Kallosh, A

R. Kallosh, A. Linde and D. Roest, Universal Attractor for Inflation at Strong Coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.112 (2014) 011303 [ 1310.3950]

arXiv 2014
[8]

A. A. Starobinsky, S. Tsujikawa and J. Yokoyama, Cosmological perturbations from multifield inflation in generalized Einstein theories, Nucl. Phys. B 610 (2001) 383 [ astro-ph/0107555]

arXiv 2001

Show all 110 references

[9]

Wands, Multiple field inflation, Lect

D. Wands, Multiple field inflation, Lect. Notes Phys.738 (2008) 275 [ astro-ph/0702187]

2008 arXiv
[10]

Senatore and M

L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga, The Effective Field Theory of Multifield Inflation, JHEP 04 (2012) 024 [ 1009.2093]

2012 arXiv
[11]

Achúcarro, V

A. Achúcarro, V. Atal and Y. Welling, On the viability ofm2ϕ2 and natural inflation, JCAP 07 (2015) 008 [ 1503.07486]. – 27 –

2015 arXiv
[12]

Kannike, G

K. Kannike, G. Hütsi, L. Pizza, A. Racioppi, M. Raidal, A. Salvio et al., Dynamically Induced Planck Scale and Inflation, JHEP 05 (2015) 065 [ 1502.01334]

2015 arXiv
[13]

Rinaldi and L

M. Rinaldi and L. Vanzo, Inflation and reheating in theories with spontaneous scale invariance symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. D94 (2016) 024009 [ 1512.07186]

2016 arXiv
[14]

A. A. Starobinsky, A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity, Phys. Lett. B 91 (1980) 99

1980
[15]

De Felice and S

A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, f(R) theories, Living Rev. Rel.13 (2010) 3 [ 1002.4928]

2010 arXiv
[16]

Racioppi and A

A. Racioppi and A. Salvio, Natural metric-affine inflation, JCAP 06 (2024) 033 [ 2403.18004]

2024 arXiv
[17]

Gonzalez Quaglia and G

R. Gonzalez Quaglia and G. German, A comparison between the Jordan and Einstein frames in Brans-Dicke theories with torsion, Eur. Phys. J. Plus138 (2023) 93 [ 2206.14228]

2023 arXiv
[18]

Shaposhnikov, A

M. Shaposhnikov, A. Shkerin, I. Timiryasov and S. Zell, Higgs inflation in Einstein-Cartan gravity, JCAP 02 (2021) 008 [ 2007.14978]

2021 arXiv
[19]

Raatikainen and S

S. Raatikainen and S. Rasanen, Higgs inflation and teleparallel gravity, JCAP 12 (2019) 021 [1910.03488]

2019 arXiv
[20]

T. M. Guimarães, R. d. C. Lima and S. H. Pereira, Cosmological inflation driven by a scalar torsion function, Eur. Phys. J. C81 (2021) 271 [ 2011.13906]

2021 arXiv
[21]

Freese, J

K. Freese, J. A. Frieman and A. V. Olinto, Natural inflation with pseudo - Nambu-Goldstone bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett.65 (1990) 3233

1990
[22]

Berera, Warm inflation solution to the eta problem, PoS AHEP2003 (2003) 069 [hep-ph/0401139]

A. Berera, Warm inflation solution to the eta problem, PoS AHEP2003 (2003) 069 [hep-ph/0401139]

2003 arXiv
[23]

D. A. Easson and R. Gregory, Circumventing the eta problem, Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 083518 [0902.1798]

2009 arXiv
[24]

Ashoorioon, U

A. Ashoorioon, U. Danielsson and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, 1/N resolution to inflationary η-problem, Phys. Lett. B713 (2012) 353 [ 1112.2272]

2012 arXiv
[25]

F. C. Adams, J. R. Bond, K. Freese, J. A. Frieman and A. V. Olinto, Natural inflation: Particle physics models, power law spectra for large scale structure, and constraints from COBE, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 426 [ hep-ph/9207245]

1993 arXiv
[26]

Schimmrigk, Modular Inflation Observables andj-Inflation Phenomenology, JHEP 09 (2017) 043 [ 1612.09559]

R. Schimmrigk, Modular Inflation Observables andj-Inflation Phenomenology, JHEP 09 (2017) 043 [ 1612.09559]

2017 arXiv
[27]

G. F. Casas and L. E. Ibáñez, Modular Invariant Starobinsky Inflation and the Species Scale, 2407.12081

arXiv
[28]

Kallosh and A

R. Kallosh and A. Linde, SL(2, Z) Cosmological Attractors, 2408.05203

arXiv
[29]

BICEP, Keck collaboration, Improved Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season, Phys. Rev. Lett.127 (2021) 151301 [ 2110.00483]

2021
[30]

Freese and W

K. Freese and W. H. Kinney, Natural Inflation: Consistency with Cosmic Microwave Background Observations of Planck and BICEP2, JCAP 03 (2015) 044 [ 1403.5277]

2015 arXiv
[31]

Holman, S

R. Holman, S. D. H. Hsu, T. W. Kephart, E. W. Kolb, R. Watkins and L. M. Widrow, Solutions to the strong CP problem in a world with gravity, Phys. Lett. B282 (1992) 132 [hep-ph/9203206]

1992 arXiv
[32]

Banks, M

T. Banks, M. Dine, P. J. Fox and E. Gorbatov, On the possibility of large axion decay constants, JCAP 06 (2003) 001 [ hep-th/0303252]

2003 arXiv
[33]

Germani and A

C. Germani and A. Kehagias, UV-Protected Inflation, Phys. Rev. Lett.106 (2011) 161302 [1012.0853]. – 28 –

2011 arXiv
[34]

Germani and Y

C. Germani and Y. Watanabe, UV-protected (Natural) Inflation: Primordial Fluctuations and non-Gaussian Features, JCAP 07 (2011) 031 [ 1106.0502]

2011 arXiv
[35]

Dimastrogiovanni, M

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, M. Michelotti and L. Pinol, Primordial gravitational waves in non-minimally coupled chromo-natural inflation, JCAP 02 (2024) 039 [ 2303.10718]

2024 arXiv
[36]

Bartolo, L

N. Bartolo, L. Caloni, G. Orlando and A. Ricciardone, Tensor non-Gaussianity in chiral scalar-tensor theories of gravity, JCAP 03 (2021) 073 [ 2008.01715]

2021 arXiv
[37]

M. M. Anber and L. Sorbo, Naturally inflating on steep potentials through electromagnetic dissipation, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 043534 [ 0908.4089]

2010 arXiv
[38]

Barnaby and M

N. Barnaby and M. Peloso, Large Nongaussianity in Axion Inflation, Phys.Rev.Lett. 106 (2011) 181301 [ 1011.1500]

2011 arXiv
[39]

Barnaby, R

N. Barnaby, R. Namba and M. Peloso, Phenomenology of a Pseudo-Scalar Inflaton: Naturally Large Nongaussianity, JCAP 04 (2011) 009 [ 1102.4333]

2011 arXiv
[40]

J. L. Cook and L. Sorbo, Particle production during inflation and gravitational waves detectable by ground-based interferometers, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 023534 [ 1109.0022]

2012 arXiv
[41]

Mukohyama, R

S. Mukohyama, R. Namba, M. Peloso and G. Shiu, Blue Tensor Spectrum from Particle Production during Inflation, JCAP 08 (2014) 036 [ 1405.0346]

2014 arXiv
[42]

Özsoy, K

O. Özsoy, K. Sinha and S. Watson, How Well Can We Really Determine the Scale of Inflation?, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 103509 [ 1410.0016]

2015 arXiv
[43]

Namba, M

R. Namba, M. Peloso, M. Shiraishi, L. Sorbo and C. Unal, Scale-dependent gravitational waves from a rolling axion, JCAP 1601 (2016) 041 [ 1509.07521]

2016 arXiv
[44]

Peloso, L

M. Peloso, L. Sorbo and C. Unal, Rolling axions during inflation: perturbativity and signatures, JCAP 09 (2016) 001 [ 1606.00459]

2016 arXiv
[45]

Garcia-Bellido, M

J. Garcia-Bellido, M. Peloso and C. Unal, Gravitational waves at interferometer scales and primordial black holes in axion inflation, JCAP 12 (2016) 031 [ 1610.03763]

2016 arXiv
[46]

Özsoy, On Synthetic Gravitational Waves from Multi-field Inflation, JCAP 1804 (2018) 062 [ 1712.01991]

O. Özsoy, On Synthetic Gravitational Waves from Multi-field Inflation, JCAP 1804 (2018) 062 [ 1712.01991]

2018 arXiv
[47]

Domcke, V

V. Domcke, V. Guidetti, Y. Welling and A. Westphal, Resonant backreaction in axion inflation, JCAP 09 (2020) 009 [ 2002.02952]

2020 arXiv
[48]

Özsoy, Parity violating non-Gaussianity from axion-gauge field dynamics, Phys

O. Özsoy, Parity violating non-Gaussianity from axion-gauge field dynamics, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 123523 [ 2106.14895]

2021 arXiv
[49]

Talebian, A

A. Talebian, A. Nassiri-Rad and H. Firouzjahi, Stochastic effects in axion inflation and primordial black hole formation, Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) 103516 [ 2202.02062]

2022 arXiv
[50]

Campeti, O

P. Campeti, O. Özsoy, I. Obata and M. Shiraishi, New constraints on axion-gauge field dynamics during inflation from Planck and BICEP/Keck data sets, JCAP 07 (2022) 039 [2203.03401]

2022 arXiv
[51]

Caravano, E

A. Caravano, E. Komatsu, K. D. Lozanov and J. Weller, Lattice Simulations of Axion-U(1) Inflation, 2204.12874

arXiv
[52]

Dimastrogiovanni, M

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, J. M. Leedom, M. Putti and A. Westphal, Gravitational axiverse spectroscopy: seeing the forest for the axions, JHEP 08 (2024) 072 [ 2312.13431]

2024 arXiv
[53]

Putti, N

M. Putti, N. Bartolo, S. Bhattacharya and M. Peloso, CMB spectral distortions from enhanced primordial perturbations: the role of spectator axions, JCAP 08 (2024) 016 [ 2403.08594]

2024 arXiv
[54]

Durrer, R

R. Durrer, R. von Eckardstein, D. Garg, K. Schmitz, O. Sobol and S. Vilchinskii, Scalar perturbations from inflation in the presence of gauge fields, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 043533 [2404.19694]. – 29 –

2024 arXiv
[55]

K. Alam, K. Dutta and N. Jaman, CMB Constraints on Natural Inflation with Gauge Field Production, 2405.10155

arXiv
[56]

Özsoy, A

O. Özsoy, A. Papageorgiou and M. Fasiello, Scale-dependent chirality as a smoking gun for Abelian gauge fields during inflation, 2405.14963

arXiv
[57]

Caravano and M

A. Caravano and M. Peloso, Unveiling the nonlinear dynamics of a rolling axion during inflation, 2407.13405

arXiv
[58]

Maleknejad and M

A. Maleknejad and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Non-Abelian Gauge Field Inflation, Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 043515 [ 1102.1932]

2011 arXiv
[59]

Maleknejad and M

A. Maleknejad and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Gauge-flation: Inflation From Non-Abelian Gauge Fields, Phys. Lett. B723 (2013) 224 [ 1102.1513]

2013 arXiv
[60]

Adshead and M

P. Adshead and M. Wyman, Chromo-Natural Inflation: Natural inflation on a steep potential with classical non-Abelian gauge fields, Phys. Rev. Lett.108 (2012) 261302 [ 1202.2366]

2012 arXiv
[61]

Dimastrogiovanni, M

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello and A. J. Tolley, Low-Energy Effective Field Theory for Chromo-Natural Inflation, JCAP 02 (2013) 046 [ 1211.1396]

2013 arXiv
[62]

Dimastrogiovanni and M

E. Dimastrogiovanni and M. Peloso, Stability analysis of chromo-natural inflation and possible evasion of Lyth’s bound, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 103501 [ 1212.5184]

2013 arXiv
[63]

Adshead, E

P. Adshead, E. Martinec and M. Wyman, Gauge fields and inflation: Chiral gravitational waves, fluctuations, and the Lyth bound, Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 021302 [ 1301.2598]

2013 arXiv
[64]

Adshead, E

P. Adshead, E. Martinec and M. Wyman, Perturbations in Chromo-Natural Inflation, JHEP 09 (2013) 087 [ 1305.2930]

2013 arXiv
[65]

Namba, E

R. Namba, E. Dimastrogiovanni and M. Peloso, Gauge-flation confronted with Planck, JCAP 11 (2013) 045 [ 1308.1366]

2013 arXiv
[66]

Obata and J

I. Obata and J. Soda, Chiral primordial Chiral primordial gravitational waves from dilaton induced delayed chromonatural inflation, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 123502 [ 1602.06024]

2016 arXiv
[67]

Dimastrogiovanni, M

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello and T. Fujita, Primordial Gravitational Waves from Axion-Gauge Fields Dynamics, JCAP 01 (2017) 019 [ 1608.04216]

2017 arXiv
[68]

Adshead, E

P. Adshead, E. Martinec, E. I. Sfakianakis and M. Wyman, Higgsed Chromo-Natural Inflation, JHEP 12 (2016) 137 [ 1609.04025]

2016 arXiv
[69]

R. R. Caldwell and C. Devulder, Axion Gauge Field Inflation and Gravitational Leptogenesis: A Lower Bound on B Modes from the Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry of the Universe, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 023532 [ 1706.03765]

2018 arXiv
[70]

Agrawal, T

A. Agrawal, T. Fujita and E. Komatsu, Large tensor non-Gaussianity from axion-gauge field dynamics, Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) 103526 [ 1707.03023]

2018 arXiv
[71]

Thorne, T

B. Thorne, T. Fujita, M. Hazumi, N. Katayama, E. Komatsu and M. Shiraishi, Finding the chiral gravitational wave background of an axion-SU(2) inflationary model using CMB observations and laser interferometers, Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) 043506 [ 1707.03240]

2018 arXiv
[72]

K. D. Lozanov, A. Maleknejad and E. Komatsu, Schwinger Effect by anSU (2) Gauge Field during Inflation, JHEP 02 (2019) 041 [ 1805.09318]

2019 arXiv
[73]

Dimastrogiovanni, M

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, R. J. Hardwick, H. Assadullahi, K. Koyama and D. Wands, Non-Gaussianity from Axion-Gauge Fields Interactions during Inflation, JCAP 11 (2018) 029 [1806.05474]

2018 arXiv
[74]

Domcke, B

V. Domcke, B. Mares, F. Muia and M. Pieroni, Emerging chromo-natural inflation, JCAP 04 (2019) 034 [ 1807.03358]

2019 arXiv
[75]

Fujita, R

T. Fujita, R. Namba and I. Obata, Mixed Non-Gaussianity from Axion-Gauge Field Dynamics, JCAP 04 (2019) 044 [ 1811.12371]. – 30 –

2019 arXiv
[76]

Dall’Agata, Chromo-Natural inflation in Supergravity, Phys

G. Dall’Agata, Chromo-Natural inflation in Supergravity, Phys. Lett. B782 (2018) 139 [1804.03104]

2018 arXiv
[77]

Mirzagholi, E

L. Mirzagholi, E. Komatsu, K. D. Lozanov and Y. Watanabe, Effects of Gravitational Chern-Simons during Axion-SU(2) Inflation, JCAP 06 (2020) 024 [ 2003.05931]

2020 arXiv
[78]

Watanabe and E

Y. Watanabe and E. Komatsu, Gravitational Wave from Axion-SU(2) Gauge Fields: Effective Field Theory for Kinetically Driven Inflation, 2004.04350

2004 arXiv
[79]

Campeti, E

P. Campeti, E. Komatsu, D. Poletti and C. Baccigalupi, Measuring the spectrum of primordial gravitational waves with CMB, PTA and Laser Interferometers, JCAP 01 (2021) 012 [2007.04241]

2021 arXiv
[80]

Holland, I

J. Holland, I. Zavala and G. Tasinato, On chromonatural inflation in string theory, JCAP 12 (2020) 026 [ 2009.00653]

2020 arXiv
[81]

Iarygina and E

O. Iarygina and E. I. Sfakianakis, Gravitational waves from spectator Gauge-flation, JCAP 11 (2021) 023 [ 2105.06972]

2021 arXiv
[82]

Fujita, K

T. Fujita, K. Murai, I. Obata and M. Shiraishi, Gravitational wave trispectrum in the axion-SU(2) model, JCAP 01 (2022) 007 [ 2109.06457]

2022 arXiv
[83]

Ishiwata, E

K. Ishiwata, E. Komatsu and I. Obata, Axion-gauge field dynamics with backreaction, JCAP 03 (2022) 010 [ 2111.14429]

2022 arXiv
[84]

Adshead, A

P. Adshead, A. Liu and K. D. Lozanov, Production and backreaction of massive fermions during axion inflation with non-Abelian gauge fields, JCAP 09 (2022) 043 [ 2203.09370]

2022 arXiv
[85]

Fujita, K

T. Fujita, K. Murai and R. Namba, Universality of linear perturbations in SU(N) natural inflation, Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) 103518 [ 2203.03977]

2022 arXiv
[86]

Bagherian, M

H. Bagherian, M. Reece and W. L. Xu, The inflated Chern-Simons number in spectator chromo-natural inflation, JHEP 01 (2023) 099 [ 2207.11262]

2023 arXiv
[87]

Iarygina, E

O. Iarygina, E. I. Sfakianakis, R. Sharma and A. Brandenburg, Backreaction of axion-SU(2) dynamics during inflation, JCAP 04 (2024) 018 [ 2311.07557]

2024 arXiv
[88]

Dimastrogiovanni, M

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello and A. Papageorgiou, A novel PBH production mechanism from non-Abelian gauge fields during inflation, 2403.13581

arXiv
[89]

Dimastrogiovanni, M

E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, M. Michelotti and O. Özsoy, A universal constraint on axion non-Abelian dynamics during inflation, 2405.17411

arXiv
[90]

Badger, H

C. Badger, H. Duval, T. Fujita, S. Kuroyanagi, A. Romero-Rodríguez and M. Sakellariadou, Detection prospects of gravitational waves from SU(2) axion inflation, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 084063 [ 2406.11742]

2024 arXiv
[91]

Murata and T

T. Murata and T. Kobayashi, Chromo-natural inflation supported by enhanced friction from Horndeski gravity, JCAP 10 (2024) 044 [ 2408.01773]

2024 arXiv
[92]

Brandenburg, O

A. Brandenburg, O. Iarygina, E. I. Sfakianakis and R. Sharma, Magnetogenesis from axion-SU(2) inflation, 2408.17413

arXiv
[93]

German, A Natural Inflation inspired model, Gen

G. German, A Natural Inflation inspired model, Gen. Rel. Grav.54 (2022) 48 [ 2106.08326]

2022 arXiv
[94]

Planck collaboration, Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation, Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A10 [ 1807.06211]

2020 arXiv
[95]

G. W. Horndeski, Second-order scalar-tensor field equations in a four-dimensional space, Int. J. Theor. Phys.10 (1974) 363

1974
[96]

Langlois and K

D. Langlois and K. Noui, Degenerate higher derivative theories beyond Horndeski: evading the Ostrogradski instability, JCAP 02 (2016) 034 [ 1510.06930]

2016 arXiv
[97]

Ben Achour, D

J. Ben Achour, D. Langlois and K. Noui, Degenerate higher order scalar-tensor theories beyond Horndeski and disformal transformations, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 124005 [ 1602.08398]. – 31 –

2016 arXiv
[98]

Kobayashi, M

T. Kobayashi, M. Yamaguchi and J. Yokoyama, G-inflation: Inflation driven by the Galileon field, Phys. Rev. Lett.105 (2010) 231302 [ 1008.0603]

2010 arXiv
[99]

Burrage, C

C. Burrage, C. de Rham, D. Seery and A. J. Tolley, Galileon inflation, JCAP 01 (2011) 014 [1009.2497]

2011 arXiv
[100]

R. M. Wald, General Relativity. Chicago Univ. Pr., Chicago, USA, 1984, 10.7208/chicago/9780226870373.001.0001

1984
[101]

Garcia-Bellido, M

J. Garcia-Bellido, M. Peloso and C. Unal, Gravitational Wave signatures of inflationary models from Primordial Black Hole Dark Matter, JCAP 09 (2017) 013 [ 1707.02441]

2017 arXiv
[102]

Maleknejad and E

A. Maleknejad and E. Erfani, Chromo-Natural Model in Anisotropic Background, JCAP 03 (2014) 016 [ 1311.3361]

2014 arXiv
[103]

Wolfson, A

I. Wolfson, A. Maleknejad, T. Murata, E. Komatsu and T. Kobayashi, The isotropic attractor solution of axion-SU(2) inflation: universal isotropization in Bianchi type-I geometry, JCAP 09 (2021) 031 [ 2105.06259]

2021 arXiv
[104]

Peloso and L

M. Peloso and L. Sorbo, Instability in axion inflation with strong backreaction from gauge modes, 2209.08131

arXiv
[105]

Garcia-Bellido, A

J. Garcia-Bellido, A. Papageorgiou, M. Peloso and L. Sorbo, A flashing beacon in axion inflation: recurring bursts of gravitational waves in the strong backreaction regime, JCAP 01 (2024) 034 [ 2303.13425]

2024 arXiv
[106]

D. G. Figueroa, J. Lizarraga, A. Urio and J. Urrestilla, Strong Backreaction Regime in Axion Inflation, Phys. Rev. Lett.131 (2023) 151003 [ 2303.17436]

2023 arXiv
[107]

Seto and A

N. Seto and A. Taruya, Measuring a Parity Violation Signature in the Early Universe via Ground-based Laser Interferometers, Phys. Rev. Lett.99 (2007) 121101 [ 0707.0535]

2007 arXiv
[108]

T. L. Smith and R. Caldwell, Sensitivity to a Frequency-Dependent Circular Polarization in an Isotropic Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background, Phys. Rev. D95 (2017) 044036 [1609.05901]

2017 arXiv
[109]

Domcke, J

V. Domcke, J. Garcia-Bellido, M. Peloso, M. Pieroni, A. Ricciardone, L. Sorbo et al., Measuring the net circular polarization of the stochastic gravitational wave background with interferometers, JCAP 05 (2020) 028 [ 1910.08052]

2020 arXiv
[110]

Papageorgiou, M

A. Papageorgiou, M. Peloso and C. Unal, Nonlinear perturbations from the coupling of the inflaton to a non-Abelian gauge field, with a focus on Chromo-Natural Inflation, JCAP 09 (2018) 030 [ 1806.08313]. – 32 –

2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

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

1981

[2] [2]

A. D. Linde, The Inflationary Universe, Rept. Prog. Phys.47 (1984) 925

1984

[3] [3]

D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto, Particle physics models of inflation and the cosmological density perturbation, Phys. Rept. 314 (1999) 1 [ hep-ph/9807278]

arXiv 1999

[4] [4]

Martin, C

J. Martin, C. Ringeval and V. Vennin, Encyclopædia Inflationaris, Phys. Dark Univ.5-6 (2014) 75 [ 1303.3787]

arXiv 2014

[5] [5]

A. D. Linde, Chaotic Inflation, Phys. Lett. B129 (1983) 177

1983

[6] [6]

A. D. Linde, Hybrid inflation, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 748 [ astro-ph/9307002]

arXiv 1994

[7] [7]

Kallosh, A

R. Kallosh, A. Linde and D. Roest, Universal Attractor for Inflation at Strong Coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.112 (2014) 011303 [ 1310.3950]

arXiv 2014

[8] [8]

A. A. Starobinsky, S. Tsujikawa and J. Yokoyama, Cosmological perturbations from multifield inflation in generalized Einstein theories, Nucl. Phys. B 610 (2001) 383 [ astro-ph/0107555]

arXiv 2001