REVIEW 1 cited by
Minimal Higgs inflation
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
In this paper we propose two simple minimal Higgs inflation scenarios through a simple modification of the Higgs potential, as opposed to the usual non-minimal Higgs-gravity coupling prescription. The modification is done in such a way that it creates a flat plateau for a huge range of field values at the inflationary energy scale $\mu \simeq (\lambda)^{1/4} \alpha$. Assuming the perturbative Higgs quartic coupling, $\lambda \simeq {\cal O}(1)$, for both the models inflation energy scale turned out to be $\mu \simeq (10^{14}, 10^{15})$ GeV, and prediction of all the cosmologically relevant quantities, $(n_s,r,dn_s^k)$, fit extremely well with observations made by PLANCK. Considering observed central value of the scalar spectral index, $n_s= 0.968$, our two models predict efolding number, $N = (52,47)$. Within a wide range of viable parameter space, we found that the prediction of tensor to scalar ratio $r (\leq 10^{-5})$ is far below the current experimental sensitivity to be observed in the near future. The prediction for the running of scalar spectral index, $dn_s^k$, approximately remains the same as was predicted by the usual chaotic and quartic inflation scenario. We also the computed the background field dependent unitarity scale $\Lambda(h)$, which turned out to be much larger than the aforementioned inflationary energy.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Minimal Plateau Inflation in light of ACT DR6 Observations
A minimal plateau inflation model with exponent n=2 and matter-like reheating remains consistent with the latest CMB datasets at both 1σ and 2σ, while stiffer reheating scenarios are increasingly disfavored.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.