Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Bootstrapping the Cosmological Collider with Resonant Features

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Periodically varying couplings during inflation can amplify the cosmological collider signal of heavy particles, replacing the Boltzmann suppression with a resonance enhancement when the oscillation frequency is at least the particle mass.

desk verdict A solid bootstrap computation for resonant cosmological colliders whose central caveat is the unproven x1 trick; worth refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.19066 v1 pith:E3NRT7R7 submitted 2025-05-25 hep-th

Dong-Gang Wang , Bowei Zhang This is my paper
classification hep-th PACS 98.80.Cq98.80.Es11.25.-w
keywords cosmologicalcolliderresonantnon-Gaussianitybootstrapprimordialbispectrumaxionmonodromyheavyfieldsduringinflationoscillatorycouplingssingle-fieldEFT
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

The paper argues that in inflationary models with a discrete shift symmetry, periodically oscillating couplings act as a resonant pump for heavy fields, so masses far above the Hubble scale no longer make particle signals exponentially invisible. It derives boundary differential equations for the massive-exchange three-point functions and solves them analytically for any kinematics. It finds that when the oscillation frequency satisfies $\omega \gtrsim m \gg H$, the Boltzmann factor $\mathrm{e}^{-\pi m/H}$ is replaced by a much milder suppression, and new non-Gaussian shapes appear that combine resonant features with the collider signal. Applied to axion monodromy inflation with a heavy modulus, the result implies that the modulus cannot be integrated out and can produce $f_{\mathrm{NL}}$ of order 10 to 100 in the squeezed limit.

What carries the argument

The engine is the boundary bootstrap for massive exchanges with oscillatory couplings, built from the mixed propagator $\hat K_\pm(k\eta,x_1)$ and the scalar seed $\hat I(u,x_1)$. The mixed propagator converts a massive field into the inflaton through a time-dependent quadratic vertex and satisfies an inhomogeneous equation of motion; by defining $x_1\equiv k\eta_1$ and treating it as a constant while solving, the equation can be traded for $k$-derivatives and solved systematically. The scalar seed obeys a second-order boundary differential equation in $u=k_3/k_{12}$ whose operator is modified by the oscillatory frequency $\alpha$, with sources fixed by the oscillatory couplings. Homogeneous and particular solutions encode the collider signal and the resonant features, and weight-shifting operators then map the seed to the inflationary bispectrum.

What would settle it

Numerically evaluating the bulk in-in integral for the mixed propagator and the scalar seed $\hat I(u,x_1)$ at $\alpha\ge\mu$ and comparing the resulting $k$-running with the boundary-bootstrap solution would settle the $x_1$ trick; disagreement at the level of the enhancement factors $E_{B1},E_{B2}$ would refute the paper's central resonance claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that resonance among the Bunch-Davies vacuum oscillations $\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}k\eta}$, the massive-field oscillations $\mathrm{e}^{\pm\mathrm{i}mt}$, and a coupling $\cos(\omega t)$ replaces the Boltzmann suppression for heavy fields: the collider signal is no longer exponentially small once $\omega \gtrsim m \gg H$. In the bootstrap solution this shows up in enhancement factors $E_{B1}$ and $E_{B2}$ that grow from $\mathrm{e}^{-\pi\mu}$ to roughly $1/\sqrt{\mu\alpha}$ when the coupling frequencies $\alpha_1,\alpha_2$ reach the mass parameter $\mu$, with a softened suppression $\mathrm{e}^{-\pi(\mu-\alpha_1)}$ in between. The same mechanism means a heavy modulus in axion monodromy inflation is continuously excited by the oscillating axion background; the single-field EFT breaks down, and the squeezed bispectrum can carry $f_{\mathrm{NL}}$ of order 10 to 100. The paper derives the full analytical shape of these correlators rather than only the squeezed limit.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation relies on treating $x_1 \equiv k\eta_1$ as a constant while solving the differential equations and restoring its momentum dependence only at the end, a shortcut whose full validity for general time-dependent couplings is not proven; if it misses scale dependence, the enhancement factors and running change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Heavy fields with $m\gg H$ no longer have to be exponentially invisible: whenever the coupling oscillates at frequency $\omega\gtrsim m$, the squeezed bispectrum carries collider oscillations at order-one amplitude rather than $\mathrm{e}^{-\pi m/H}$.
  • The single-field EFT of axion monodromy inflation is not universally valid: in the regime $\omega\gtrsim m$ the heavy modulus is continuously excited, so integrating it out misses the dominant bispectrum.
  • The primordial bispectrum acquires a new family of shapes that superimpose scale-invariant collider oscillations with scale-dependent resonant running, giving templates with a clear frequency structure for CMB and large-scale-structure searches.
  • For natural model parameters such as $b_*\sim 0.1$, $\epsilon_0 M_{\mathrm{Pl}}^2/2\Lambda^2\sim 1$, and $\alpha\lesssim 400$, the model predicts $f_{\mathrm{NL}}$ of order 10 to 100 while keeping the oscillatory power-spectrum correction within the Planck bound $\delta n\lesssim 0.05$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The $x_1$ trick is the load-bearing approximation; a natural next test is to repeat the boundary solution for a coupling with a finite-width or localized feature to see whether the resonant enhancement survives beyond the exact power-law form.
  • The same resonance mechanism should operate in other oscillating inflationary systems, such as periodic turns in multi-field inflation or oscillating sound speed, where analogous boundary equations could be written down and checked for enhancement.
  • If the combined template is searched in data, the ratio of the collider frequency to the resonant running frequency would directly measure $\mu/\alpha$, i.e. the ratio of the heavy mass to the oscillation frequency, and a nondetection would set model-independent bounds on $\Lambda$ and $b_*$ within this class of 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.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper develops a boundary (bootstrap) computation of massive-exchange three-point correlators with periodically oscillating couplings, extending the boostless bootstrap to backgrounds with a discrete shift symmetry. The authors derive boundary differential equations for the mixed propagator of the quadratic φ̇σ vertex (Sec. 3.1) and for the primary scalar seeds with one (Sec. 3.2.1) or two (Sec. 3.2.2) oscillatory couplings, solve them analytically in hypergeometric series, and obtain inflaton bispectra by weight-shifting (Sec. 3.3). The central claim is that resonances between the Bunch-Davies vacuum, the massive-mode oscillations, and the oscillatory coupling (frequency ω = αH) remove the Boltzmann suppression e^{-πµ} for m ≫ H when ω ≳ m; the enhancement factors E_B1, E_B2 (Eqs. (4.6)–(4.7)) and the new two-frequency bispectrum shapes are computed in full. These results are then applied to a two-field axion-monodromy model with a heavy modulus (Sec. 5), where the authors argue that the modulus cannot be integrated out and that the squeezed bispectrum can reach f_NL ~ O(10–100).

Significance. If correct, this is a substantial advance: it provides the first full analytical bootstrap solution for cosmological-collider signals with explicitly scale-dependent (resonant) features, renders the approximate analysis of Ref. [55] exact at the level of full kinematic shapes, and identifies a concrete UV-motivated scenario in which the conventional single-field EFT fails because a heavy modulus is continuously excited. The manuscript contains several genuine internal checks that give moderate confidence in the technical core: the α = 0 limits reduce to the known results of Ref. [17]; the contact example of Sec. 2.3 is verified against the explicit bulk integral; the enhancement-factor asymptotics (4.8) reproduce the approximate results of Ref. [55]; and the detailed ODE derivation in Appendix B is explicit. The principal weaknesses are the unjustified 'x1 trick' (Sec. 3.1), the stated-but-unproven weight-shifting operator for the φφ̇σ vertex (Sec. 3.3), and the borderline parameter benchmarks used for the headline f_NL estimates (Sec. 5.4).

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.1, Eqs. (3.3)–(3.10), (3.21)] The 'x1 trick' of Sec. 3.1 is the load-bearing technical step of the paper: x1 ≡ kη1 is treated as a k-independent constant in deriving and solving the boundary differential equations, and k-dependence is restored only at the end. The manuscript does not justify this step. It is not a priori innocuous: after restoring x1 = k3η1, the scalar seeds no longer satisfy the displayed ODEs with respect to k3, since ∂_{k3} also acts on x1 and generates O(α/k3) terms that are absent from the derivation. For the couplings actually treated (cos(α log...), a sum of two power laws) the step can be shown to be exact: for a power-law coupling the x1-dependence of every component is a multiplicative phase (kη1)^{∓iα}, which commutes with O_η, and the soft-limit boundary conditions (3.6)–(3.7) fix both homogeneous coefficients, so the ODE solution with x1 restored coincides with the bulk integral. This argument is not given, and the claim that the method 'can be generalized to deal with arbitrary time-dependent couplings' is not supported. I request a proof of exactness for power-law couplings (covering the cos case by linearity), or alternatively a numerical comparison of (3.9)/(3.20) with direct evaluation of the corresponding bulk integrals, before the enhancement factors (4.6)–(4.7) and the f_NL estimates are treated as established.
  2. [Sec. 3.3, Eqs. (3.29)–(3.31)] The weight-shifting operator W^{φφ̇σ} for the cubic vertex φφ̇σ is stated in Eqs. (3.29)–(3.31) ('we simply notice that its bulk integral can be written into the following form') rather than derived, in contrast to the (∂µφ)²σ operator (3.27), which is quoted from the literature. This operator underlies the bispectrum template (3.30) and the dominant axion-monodromy signal (5.37)–(5.38). Please provide the derivation, including the action of ∂_η on the external K^φ factors and the commutation with the oscillatory phase α2 log(k3η/x2), or verify (3.29)–(3.31) against a direct evaluation of the bulk integral for representative kinematics.
  3. [Sec. 5.4, Eqs. (5.6), (5.36)–(5.40), Fig. 10] The headline estimates f_NL ~ O(10)–O(100) rest on benchmarks that sit at or beyond the edge of the model's own consistency conditions. The choice ε0 M_Pl²/(2Λ²) = 1 used for Fig. 10 and the 'O(10)' statement gives Φ̇/Λ = 2H, which violates the last condition of Eq. (5.6), 'Φ̇/Λ ≪ H'. The third condition of (5.6), 'Λ, Λ̃ ≫ Φ̇√αH', is also typeset ambiguously (multiple readings are possible) and should be stated precisely. As written, the reader cannot tell whether the f_NL ~ 10–100 numbers are attainable inside the region where the two-field description is self-consistent. In addition, the two displayed lines of (5.38) are inconsistent: with |F^{φφ̇σ}(µ,α)| = |5+i(µ+α)| ≈ α for α ≫ µ, the first line gives a coefficient −1/4 (not −1/2); the replacement |F| ≈ 2α is valid only for α ≈ µ. Please fix the asymptotics and the benchmark bookkeeping and report the maximum f_NL within the allowed region.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction] In the Introduction, the sentence 'ω is larger than the massive of the heavy field' should read 'larger than the mass of the heavy field'.
  2. [Sec. 5.1] The phrase 'the slow-roll field velocity ˙Φ1/2 ≃ 60H' is ambiguous; please specify whether the square root of the velocity or another combination is intended.
  3. [Sec. 3.2.2 / Fig. 1] In the text following Figure 1, the sentence 'the seed function in Figure 1a is featureless' refers to Figure 1a twice; the second reference should presumably be to Figure 1b.
  4. [Sec. 4.1, Eqs. (4.4)–(4.5)] The amplitude relations δn_α = −λ0λα|E_P1| and δn_{2α} = −λα²|E_P2| appear to miss a factor of 2 relative to the explicit c.c. in (4.4); please state the convention for δn_α, since Eq. (5.36) inherits it.
  5. [Sec. 3.1, Eq. (3.7)] The evaluation leading to the soft-limit coefficients A±(x1) in Eq. (3.7) is stated without derivation; please include the computation of the k → 0 limit of the integral (3.1) or provide an explicit reference.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the resonance enhancement and f_NL estimates are computed from explicit bulk integrals and Gamma-function asymptotics, not fitted or defined into existence.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The central claim, that oscillatory couplings with frequency ω ≳ m can overcome the Boltzmann suppression, is obtained from explicit in-in bulk integrals (e.g., Eqs. (2.17)-(2.18), (3.6)-(3.7)) and from the large-argument asymptotics of the resulting Gamma functions. The bootstrap differential equations are derived from the massive-field equation of motion, and the free coefficients in the homogeneous solutions are fixed by matching to explicit bulk integrals in the squeezed and folded limits, not by assuming the desired enhancement. The quoted enhancement factors EB1 and EB2 in Eqs. (4.6)-(4.7) are explicit analytic functions of μ, α1, α2, and the claimed f_NL ~ O(10-100) in Section 5.4 follows by substituting model parameters into these computed expressions. The x1-constant trick of Section 3.1 is an approximation whose validity is not fully proven, but it is a correctness risk rather than a circularity: the prediction is not equivalent to an input by construction. The self-citations, to Ref. [22] for the x1 trick and to the companion letter [61], are not load-bearing as evidence; the trick is explicitly described and implemented in the paper, and the companion letter is cross-referenced for overlap, not used as the source of the main result. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work to force the choice of solution.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The setup introduces no new particles and no numbers are fit to data. The calculation depends on the dS slow-roll background, the Bunch-Davies vacuum, the power-law decomposition of the oscillatory coupling, and the x1 trick; the model analysis adds parameter choices (α, μ, b_*, Λ) that are physically motivated but not fixed by a concrete compactification.

free parameters (5)
  • α (oscillation frequency in units of H) = model parameter, not fitted; in the string model α = \dot Φ/(H f) ≫ 1
    The Boltzmann suppression is overcome only when α ≳ μ, so the prediction depends directly on this chosen parameter.
  • μ (heavy field mass parameter) = model parameter, μ = sqrt(m^2/H^2 - 9/4), with μ ≫ 1 for heavy fields
    Sets the collider oscillation frequency and the Boltzmann factor; comparison with α controls the enhancement.
  • b_* (size of the periodic modulation in axion monodromy) = set to 0.1 in numerical examples; constrained by b_* = A^4/(V'_sr f) ≪ 1
    The final f_NL scales as α^2 b_*^2; the detectability claim relies on this parameter being large enough.
  • Λ (axion-modulus kinetic coupling scale) = chosen; in strong-signal example ϵ0 M_Pl^2/(2Λ^2) ~ 1; subject to conditions (5.6)
    Controls the overall strength of the oscillatory mixings and the sound speed correction; the signal size scales as 1/Λ^2.
  • Coupling strengths λ_quad, λ_cub (and phases η1, η2) = set to unity in bootstrap plots; in the model fixed by ¯g = -\dot Φ_0^2/(HΛ), g3 = ¯g α b_*
    Overall amplitude of the correlators; the exact values affect the numerical size of f_NL but not the resonance mechanism.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Bunch-Davies vacuum for the early-time mode functions
    Used throughout to fix the mode functions and to evaluate in-in integrals, e.g., Eq. (2.4).
  • domain assumption Fixed de Sitter background and slow-roll approximation
    H is treated as constant and the background as dS; the oscillating inflaton velocity is treated as a small perturbation.
  • domain assumption Oscillatory couplings decompose as a sum of two power-law terms in conformal time
    The calculation represents cos(α log(η/η1)) as ((η/η1)^{iα} + (η/η1)^{-iα})/2, enabling the boundary differential equations.
  • ad hoc to paper The 'x1 trick' is valid for time-dependent couplings
    Sec. 3.1 treats x1 = kη1 as a constant when deriving and solving the differential equations, then restores x1 = kη1. The paper does not prove this procedure within the text.
  • standard math Schwinger-Keldysh (in-in) formalism applies
    Standard framework for cosmological correlators, used in Sec. 2.
  • standard math Weight-shifting operators map conformal scalar seeds to massless inflaton correlators
    Standard bootstrap technique from Ref. [17]; the specific operator for ˙ϕϕσ is stated without full derivation in Eq. (3.31).
  • domain assumption Parameter regime (5.6) keeps the axion-monodromy trajectory perturbative
    Conditions Λ, \tildeΛ ≫ \dot Φ/(√α H) and \dot Φ/Λ ≪ H are assumed; the phenomenological conclusions depend on them.
  • domain assumption EFT decoupling limit ϵ→0 and ζ = -Hπ relation
    Used in Sec. 5.3 to derive the mixing Lagrangian and to connect field perturbations to the curvature perturbation; standard but simplifies gravitational interactions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bootstrapping the Cosmological Collider with Resonant Features." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/E3NRT7R7

@misc{pith2026250519066,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bootstrapping the Cosmological Collider with Resonant Features},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/E3NRT7R7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.19066}
}
read the original abstract

Signatures of heavy particles during inflation are exponentially suppressed by the Boltzmann factor when the masses are far above the Hubble scale. In more realistic scenarios, however, scale-dependent features may change this conventional picture and boost the cosmological collider signals. In this paper, we compute cosmological correlators of the primordial curvature perturbations exchanging an intermediate heavy field with periodically varying couplings. The basic setup corresponds to inflation scenarios with globally oscillating features that enjoy a discrete shift symmetry. Adopting the bootstrap approach, we derive and solve the boundary differential equations that are satisfied by the massive-exchange three-point functions. The presence of the oscillatory couplings leads to resonance-enhanced cosmological collider signals for heavy fields when the oscillating frequency exceeds the field masses. Meanwhile, the forms of these differential equations are modified, which generates new shapes of primordial non-Gaussianity as a combination of resonant features and collider signals. Based on these computations, we revisit the string-inspired model of axion monodromy inflation and point out that the cosmological correlators can become sensitive to heavy moduli fields of flux compactifications. This finding suggests a breakdown of the conventional single-field description, as the heavy moduli may not be simply integrated out but yield detectably large signals in the primordial bispectrum.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The Exact and Approximate Tales of Boost-Breaking Cosmological Correlators

    hep-th 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The tree-level boost-breaking cosmological collider seed correlator is computed exactly for general sound speed and chemical potential, and saddle-point methods turn it into practical elementary-function templates.

  2. Amplifying the Cosmological Collider with Ghost Spectators

    hep-th 2026-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Ghost-condensate spectator fields exchanged during inflation cut the Boltzmann suppression of cosmological collider signals to e^{-πμ/2}, amplifying heavy-particle bispectrum and trispectrum imprints.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 97 linked inside Pith · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [55]

    Classical cosmological collider physics and primordial features,

    X. Chen, R. Ebadi, and S. Kumar, “Classical cosmological collider physics and primordial features,” JCAP 08 (2022) 083, arXiv:2205.01107 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2022

  2. [23]

    Closed-form formulae for inflation correlators,

    Z. Qin and Z.-Z. Xianyu, “Closed-form formulae for inflation correlators,” JHEP 07 (2023) 001, arXiv:2301.07047 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

  3. [17]

    Boostless cosmological collider bootstrap,

    G. L. Pimentel and D.-G. Wang, “Boostless cosmological collider bootstrap,” JHEP 10 (2022) 177, arXiv:2205.00013 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

  4. [1]

    Primordial Non-Gaussianity,

    P. D. Meerburg et al. , “Primordial Non-Gaussianity,” arXiv:1903.04409 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 1903

  5. [2]

    Inflation: Theory and Observations,

    A. Ach´ ucarroet al. , “Inflation: Theory and Observations,” arXiv:2203.08128 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  6. [3]

    The Cosmological Bootstrap: Inflationary Correlators from Symmetries and Singularities,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, D. Baumann, H. Lee, and G. L. Pimentel, “The Cosmological Bootstrap: Inflationary Correlators from Symmetries and Singularities,” JHEP 04 (2020) 105, arXiv:1811.00024 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2020

  7. [4]

    The cosmological bootstrap: weight-shifting operators and scalar seeds,

    D. Baumann, C. Duaso Pueyo, A. Joyce, H. Lee, and G. L. Pimentel, “The cosmological bootstrap: weight-shifting operators and scalar seeds,” JHEP 12 (2020) 204, arXiv:1910.14051 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2020

  8. [5]

    The Cosmological Bootstrap: Spinning Correlators from Symmetries and Factorization,

    D. Baumann, C. Duaso Pueyo, A. Joyce, H. Lee, and G. L. Pimentel, “The Cosmological Bootstrap: Spinning Correlators from Symmetries and Factorization,” SciPost Phys. 11 (2021) 071, arXiv:2005.04234 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2021

Show all 100 references
  1. [6]

    Cosmological Polytopes and the Wavefunction of the Universe,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, P. Benincasa, and A. Postnikov, “Cosmological Polytopes and the Wavefunction of the Universe,” arXiv:1709.02813 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  2. [7]

    From the flat-space S-matrix to the Wavefunction of the Universe,

    P. Benincasa, “From the flat-space S-matrix to the Wavefunction of the Universe,” arXiv:1811.02515 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  3. [8]

    A Mellin Space Approach to Cosmological Correlators,

    C. Sleight, “A Mellin Space Approach to Cosmological Correlators,” JHEP 01 (2020) 090, arXiv:1906.12302 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  4. [9]

    Bootstrapping Inflationary Correlators in Mellin Space,

    C. Sleight and M. Taronna, “Bootstrapping Inflationary Correlators in Mellin Space,” JHEP 02 (2020) 098, arXiv:1907.01143 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  5. [10]

    The Cosmological Optical Theorem,

    H. Goodhew, S. Jazayeri, and E. Pajer, “The Cosmological Optical Theorem,” JCAP 04 (2021) 021, arXiv:2009.02898 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  6. [11]

    On the time evolution of cosmological correlators,

    S. C´ espedes, A.-C. Davis, and S. Melville, “On the time evolution of cosmological correlators,” JHEP 02 (2021) 012, arXiv:2009.07874 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  7. [12]

    Building a Boostless Bootstrap for the Bispectrum,

    E. Pajer, “Building a Boostless Bootstrap for the Bispectrum,” JCAP 01 (2021) 023, arXiv:2010.12818 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  8. [13]

    From locality and unitarity to cosmological correlators,

    S. Jazayeri, E. Pajer, and D. Stefanyszyn, “From locality and unitarity to cosmological correlators,” JHEP 10 (2021) 065, arXiv:2103.08649 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  9. [14]

    From amplitudes to contact cosmological correlators,

    J. Bonifacio, E. Pajer, and D.-G. Wang, “From amplitudes to contact cosmological correlators,” JHEP 10 (2021) 001, arXiv:2106.15468 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  10. [15]

    Cosmological Cutting Rules,

    S. Melville and E. Pajer, “Cosmological Cutting Rules,” JHEP 05 (2021) 249, arXiv:2103.09832 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  11. [16]

    Cutting cosmological correlators,

    H. Goodhew, S. Jazayeri, M. H. Gordon Lee, and E. Pajer, “Cutting cosmological correlators,” JCAP 08 (2021) 003, arXiv:2104.06587 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [18]

    Cosmological Bootstrap in Slow Motion,

    S. Jazayeri and S. Renaux-Petel, “Cosmological Bootstrap in Slow Motion,” arXiv:2205.10340 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  13. [19]

    Snowmass White Paper: The Cosmological Bootstrap,

    D. Baumann, D. Green, A. Joyce, E. Pajer, G. L. Pimentel, C. Sleight, and M. Taronna, “Snowmass White Paper: The Cosmological Bootstrap,” in 2022 Snowmass Summer Study . 3,

    2022

  14. [20]

    Helical Inflation Correlators: Partial Mellin-Barnes and Bootstrap Equations,

    Z. Qin and Z.-Z. Xianyu, “Helical Inflation Correlators: Partial Mellin-Barnes and Bootstrap Equations,” arXiv:2208.13790 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  15. [21]

    Bootstrapping One-Loop Inflation Correlators with the Spectral Decomposition,

    Z.-Z. Xianyu and H. Zhang, “Bootstrapping One-Loop Inflation Correlators with the Spectral Decomposition,” arXiv:2211.03810 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  16. [22]

    Bootstrapping multi-field inflation: non-Gaussianities from light scalars revisited,

    D.-G. Wang, G. L. Pimentel, and A. Ach´ ucarro, “Bootstrapping multi-field inflation: non-Gaussianities from light scalars revisited,” JCAP 05 (2023) 043, arXiv:2212.14035 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Cosmological Correlators Through the Looking Glass: Reality, Parity, and Factorisation,

    D. Stefanyszyn, X. Tong, and Y. Zhu, “Cosmological Correlators Through the Looking Glass: Reality, Parity, and Factorisation,” arXiv:2309.07769 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  18. [25]

    A Cosmological Bootstrap for Resonant Non-Gaussianity,

    C. Duaso Pueyo and E. Pajer, “A Cosmological Bootstrap for Resonant Non-Gaussianity,” arXiv:2311.01395 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  19. [26]

    On the IR Divergences in de Sitter Space: loops, resummation and the semi-classical wavefunction,

    S. C´ espedes, A.-C. Davis, and D.-G. Wang, “On the IR Divergences in de Sitter Space: loops, resummation and the semi-classical wavefunction,” arXiv:2311.17990 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  20. [27]

    Renormalisation of IR divergences and holography in de Sitter,

    A. Bzowski, P. McFadden, and K. Skenderis, “Renormalisation of IR divergences and holography in de Sitter,” arXiv:2312.17316 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  21. [28]

    Differential Equations for Cosmological Correlators,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, D. Baumann, A. Hillman, A. Joyce, H. Lee, and G. L. Pimentel, “Differential Equations for Cosmological Correlators,” arXiv:2312.05303 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  22. [29]

    Structure and complexity of cosmological correlators,

    T. W. Grimm, A. Hoefnagels, and M. van Vliet, “Structure and complexity of cosmological correlators,” Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) no. 12, 123531, arXiv:2404.03716 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [30]

    The in-out formalism for in-in correlators,

    Y. Donath and E. Pajer, “The in-out formalism for in-in correlators,” JHEP 07 (2024) 064, arXiv:2402.05999 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [31]

    A de Sitter S-matrix from amputated cosmological correlators,

    S. Melville and G. L. Pimentel, “A de Sitter S-matrix from amputated cosmological correlators,” JHEP 08 (2024) 211, arXiv:2404.05712 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Cosmological correlators with double massive exchanges: bootstrap equation and phenomenology,

    S. Aoki, L. Pinol, F. Sano, M. Yamaguchi, and Y. Zhu, “Cosmological correlators with double massive exchanges: bootstrap equation and phenomenology,” JHEP 09 (2024) 176, arXiv:2404.09547 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  26. [33]

    There and Back Again: Mapping and Factorizing Cosmological Observables,

    D. Stefanyszyn, X. Tong, and Y. Zhu, “There and Back Again: Mapping and Factorizing Cosmological Observables,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2024) no. 22, 221501, arXiv:2406.00099 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Dispersive bootstrap of massive inflation correlators,

    H. Liu, Z. Qin, and Z.-Z. Xianyu, “Dispersive bootstrap of massive inflation correlators,” JHEP 02 (2025) 101, arXiv:2407.12299 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  28. [35]

    The Cosmological CPT Theorem,

    H. Goodhew, A. Thavanesan, and A. C. Wall, “The Cosmological CPT Theorem,” arXiv:2408.17406 [hep-th]

  29. [36]

    Cosmological cutting rules for Bogoliubov initial states,

    D. Ghosh, E. Pajer, and F. Ullah, “Cosmological cutting rules for Bogoliubov initial states,” SciPost Phys. 18 (2025) no. 1, 005, arXiv:2407.06258 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Records from the S-Matrix Marathon: A Timeless History of Time,

    M. H. G. Lee, E. Pajer, M. Giroux, H. S. Hannesdottir, S. Mizera, and C. Pasiecznik, “Records from the S-Matrix Marathon: A Timeless History of Time,” 9, 2024. arXiv:2410.00227 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  31. [38]

    The Massive Flat Space Limit of Cosmological Correlators,

    S. Cespedes and S. Jazayeri, “The Massive Flat Space Limit of Cosmological Correlators,” arXiv:2501.02119 [hep-th]. 40

  32. [39]

    Strongly Coupled Sectors in Inflation: Gapless Theories and Unparticles,

    G. L. Pimentel and C. Yang, “Strongly Coupled Sectors in Inflation: Gapless Theories and Unparticles,” arXiv:2503.17840 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  33. [40]

    A Match Made in Heaven: Linking Observables in Inflationary Cosmology,

    D. Stefanyszyn, X. Tong, and Y. Zhu, “A Match Made in Heaven: Linking Observables in Inflationary Cosmology,” arXiv:2505.16071 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  34. [41]

    Generation and Characterization of Large Non-Gaussianities in Single Field Inflation,

    X. Chen, R. Easther, and E. A. Lim, “Generation and Characterization of Large Non-Gaussianities in Single Field Inflation,” JCAP 04 (2008) 010, arXiv:0801.3295 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Resonant Non-Gaussianity,

    R. Flauger and E. Pajer, “Resonant Non-Gaussianity,” JCAP 01 (2011) 017, arXiv:1002.0833 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Quasi-Single Field Inflation and Non-Gaussianities,

    X. Chen and Y. Wang, “Quasi-Single Field Inflation and Non-Gaussianities,” JCAP 04 (2010) 027, arXiv:0911.3380 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Signatures of Supersymmetry from the Early Universe,

    D. Baumann and D. Green, “Signatures of Supersymmetry from the Early Universe,” Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 103520, arXiv:1109.0292 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Effective field theory approach to quasi-single field inflation and effects of heavy fields,

    T. Noumi, M. Yamaguchi, and D. Yokoyama, “Effective field theory approach to quasi-single field inflation and effects of heavy fields,” JHEP 06 (2013) 051, arXiv:1211.1624 [hep-th]

    2013 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Cosmological Collider Physics,

    N. Arkani-Hamed and J. Maldacena, “Cosmological Collider Physics,” arXiv:1503.08043 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  40. [47]

    Searching for cosmological collider in the Planck CMB data,

    W. Sohn, D.-G. Wang, J. R. Fergusson, and E. P. S. Shellard, “Searching for cosmological collider in the Planck CMB data,” JCAP 09 (2024) 016, arXiv:2404.07203 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  41. [48]

    BOSS constraints on massive particles during inflation: The cosmological collider in action,

    G. Cabass, O. H. E. Philcox, M. M. Ivanov, K. Akitsu, S.-F. Chen, M. Simonovi´ c, and M. Zaldarriaga, “BOSS constraints on massive particles during inflation: The cosmological collider in action,” Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) no. 6, 063510, arXiv:2404.01894 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Neutrino Signatures in Primordial Non-Gaussianities,

    X. Chen, Y. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu, “Neutrino Signatures in Primordial Non-Gaussianities,” JHEP 09 (2018) 022, arXiv:1805.02656 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  43. [50]

    In Search of Large Signals at the Cosmological Collider,

    L.-T. Wang and Z.-Z. Xianyu, “In Search of Large Signals at the Cosmological Collider,” JHEP 02 (2020) 044, arXiv:1910.12876 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  44. [51]

    The Scalar Chemical Potential in Cosmological Collider Physics,

    A. Bodas, S. Kumar, and R. Sundrum, “The Scalar Chemical Potential in Cosmological Collider Physics,” JHEP 02 (2021) 079, arXiv:2010.04727 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  45. [52]

    Large Spin-2 Signals at the Cosmological Collider,

    X. Tong and Z.-Z. Xianyu, “Large Spin-2 Signals at the Cosmological Collider,” arXiv:2203.06349 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  46. [53]

    Parity violation from emergent nonlocality during inflation,

    S. Jazayeri, S. Renaux-Petel, X. Tong, D. Werth, and Y. Zhu, “Parity violation from emergent nonlocality during inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) no. 12, 123523, arXiv:2308.11315 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Non-Gaussianity as a Particle Detector,

    H. Lee, D. Baumann, and G. L. Pimentel, “Non-Gaussianity as a Particle Detector,” JHEP 12 (2016) 040, arXiv:1607.03735 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Cosmological Flow of Primordial Correlators,

    D. Werth, L. Pinol, and S. Renaux-Petel, “Cosmological Flow of Primordial Correlators,” arXiv:2302.00655 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  49. [57]

    The Cosmological Flow: A Systematic Approach to Primordial Correlators,

    L. Pinol, S. Renaux-Petel, and D. Werth, “The Cosmological Flow: A Systematic Approach to Primordial Correlators,” arXiv:2312.06559 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  50. [58]

    On the inflationary massive field with a curved field manifold,

    D.-G. Wang, “On the inflationary massive field with a curved field manifold,” JCAP 01 (2020) 046, 41 arXiv:1911.04459 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Analytic formulae for inflationary correlators with dynamical mass,

    S. Aoki, T. Noumi, F. Sano, and M. Yamaguchi, “Analytic formulae for inflationary correlators with dynamical mass,” JHEP 24 (2020) 073, arXiv:2312.09642 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [60]

    A cosmological tachyon collider: enhancing the long-short scale coupling,

    C. McCulloch, E. Pajer, and X. Tong, “A cosmological tachyon collider: enhancing the long-short scale coupling,” JHEP 05 (2024) 262, arXiv:2401.11009 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  53. [61]

    The UV Sensitivity of Axion Monodromy Inflation,

    E. Pajer, D.-G. Wang, and B. Zhang, “The UV Sensitivity of Axion Monodromy Inflation,” arXiv:2412.05762 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  54. [62]

    Monodromy in the CMB: Gravity Waves and String Inflation,

    E. Silverstein and A. Westphal, “Monodromy in the CMB: Gravity Waves and String Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 106003, arXiv:0803.3085 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Gravity Waves and Linear Inflation from Axion Monodromy,

    L. McAllister, E. Silverstein, and A. Westphal, “Gravity Waves and Linear Inflation from Axion Monodromy,” Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 046003, arXiv:0808.0706 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Oscillations in the CMB from Axion Monodromy Inflation,

    R. Flauger, L. McAllister, E. Pajer, A. Westphal, and G. Xu, “Oscillations in the CMB from Axion Monodromy Inflation,” JCAP 06 (2010) 009, arXiv:0907.2916 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Dante’s Inferno,

    M. Berg, E. Pajer, and S. Sjors, “Dante’s Inferno,” Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 103535, arXiv:0912.1341 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  58. [66]

    An Ignoble Approach to Large Field Inflation,

    N. Kaloper, A. Lawrence, and L. Sorbo, “An Ignoble Approach to Large Field Inflation,” JCAP 03 (2011) 023, arXiv:1101.0026 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Non-Gaussian features of primordial fluctuations in single field inflationary models,

    J. M. Maldacena, “Non-Gaussian features of primordial fluctuations in single field inflationary models,” JHEP 05 (2003) 013, arXiv:astro-ph/0210603

    2003 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations,

    S. Weinberg, “Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations,” Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 043514, arXiv:hep-th/0506236

    2005 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Folded Resonant Non-Gaussianity in General Single Field Inflation,

    X. Chen, “Folded Resonant Non-Gaussianity in General Single Field Inflation,” JCAP 12 (2010) 003, arXiv:1008.2485 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Quantum Primordial Standard Clocks,

    X. Chen, M. H. Namjoo, and Y. Wang, “Quantum Primordial Standard Clocks,” JCAP 02 (2016) 013, arXiv:1509.03930 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Cutting rule for cosmological collider signals: a bulk evolution perspective,

    X. Tong, Y. Wang, and Y. Zhu, “Cutting rule for cosmological collider signals: a bulk evolution perspective,” JHEP 03 (2022) 181, arXiv:2112.03448 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation,

    Planck Collaboration, Y. Akrami et al. , “Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation,” Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A10, arXiv:1807.06211 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  65. [73]

    On the importance of heavy fields during inflation,

    S. Cespedes, V. Atal, and G. A. Palma, “On the importance of heavy fields during inflation,” JCAP 05 (2012) 008, arXiv:1201.4848 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Heavy fields, reduced speeds of sound and decoupling during inflation,

    A. Achucarro, V. Atal, S. Cespedes, J.-O. Gong, G. A. Palma, and S. P. Patil, “Heavy fields, reduced speeds of sound and decoupling during inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 121301, arXiv:1205.0710 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  67. [75]

    (Small) Resonant non-Gaussianities: Signatures of a Discrete Shift Symmetry in the Effective Field Theory of Inflation,

    S. R. Behbahani, A. Dymarsky, M. Mirbabayi, and L. Senatore, “(Small) Resonant non-Gaussianities: Signatures of a Discrete Shift Symmetry in the Effective Field Theory of Inflation,” JCAP 12 (2012) 036, arXiv:1111.3373 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Resonant Trispectrum and a Dozen More Primordial N-point functions,

    L. Leblond and E. Pajer, “Resonant Trispectrum and a Dozen More Primordial N-point functions,” JCAP 01 (2011) 035, arXiv:1010.4565 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Imprints of Oscillatory Bispectra on Galaxy Clustering,

    G. Cabass, E. Pajer, and F. Schmidt, “Imprints of Oscillatory Bispectra on Galaxy Clustering,” JCAP 09 (2018) 003, arXiv:1804.07295 [astro-ph.CO]. 42

    2018 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Non-perturbative wavefunction of the universe in inflation with (resonant) features,

    P. Creminelli, S. Renaux-Petel, G. Tambalo, and V. Yingcharoenrat, “Non-perturbative wavefunction of the universe in inflation with (resonant) features,” JHEP 03 (2024) 010, arXiv:2401.10212 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Simple exercises to flatten your potential,

    X. Dong, B. Horn, E. Silverstein, and A. Westphal, “Simple exercises to flatten your potential,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 026011, arXiv:1011.4521 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Productive Interactions: heavy particles and non-Gaussianity,

    R. Flauger, M. Mirbabayi, L. Senatore, and E. Silverstein, “Productive Interactions: heavy particles and non-Gaussianity,” JCAP 10 (2017) 058, arXiv:1606.00513 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Flattened Axion Monodromy Beyond Two Derivatives,

    F. G. Pedro and A. Westphal, “Flattened Axion Monodromy Beyond Two Derivatives,” arXiv:1909.08100 [hep-th]

    1909 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Sharp turns in axion monodromy: primordial black holes and gravitational waves,

    S. Bhattacharya and I. Zavala, “Sharp turns in axion monodromy: primordial black holes and gravitational waves,” JCAP 04 (2023) 065, arXiv:2205.06065 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Fat Inflatons, Large Turns and the η-problem,

    D. Chakraborty, R. Chiovoloni, O. Loaiza-Brito, G. Niz, and I. Zavala, “Fat Inflatons, Large Turns and the η-problem,” arXiv:1908.09797 [hep-th]

    1908 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Baumann and L

    D. Baumann and L. McAllister, Inflation and String Theory . Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 5, 2015. arXiv:1404.2601 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Systematics of moduli stabilisation in Calabi-Yau flux compactifications,

    V. Balasubramanian, P. Berglund, J. P. Conlon, and F. Quevedo, “Systematics of moduli stabilisation in Calabi-Yau flux compactifications,” JHEP 03 (2005) 007, arXiv:hep-th/0502058

    2005 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Primordial Features as Evidence for Inflation,

    X. Chen, “Primordial Features as Evidence for Inflation,” JCAP 01 (2012) 038, arXiv:1104.1323 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Effective Field Theory and Decoupling in Multi-field Inflation: An Illustrative Case Study,

    G. Shiu and J. Xu, “Effective Field Theory and Decoupling in Multi-field Inflation: An Illustrative Case Study,” Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 103509, arXiv:1108.0981 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Influence of heavy modes on perturbations in multiple field inflation,

    X. Gao, D. Langlois, and S. Mizuno, “Influence of heavy modes on perturbations in multiple field inflation,” JCAP 10 (2012) 040, arXiv:1205.5275 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Models of the Primordial Standard Clock,

    X. Chen, M. H. Namjoo, and Y. Wang, “Models of the Primordial Standard Clock,” JCAP 02 (2015) 027, arXiv:1411.2349 [astro-ph.CO]

    2015 arXiv

  82. [90]

    The Gelaton Scenario: Equilateral non-Gaussianity from multi-field dynamics,

    A. J. Tolley and M. Wyman, “The Gelaton Scenario: Equilateral non-Gaussianity from multi-field dynamics,” Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 043502, arXiv:0910.1853 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Features of heavy physics in the CMB power spectrum,

    A. Achucarro, J.-O. Gong, S. Hardeman, G. A. Palma, and S. P. Patil, “Features of heavy physics in the CMB power spectrum,” JCAP 01 (2011) 030, arXiv:1010.3693 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Equilateral Non-Gaussianity and New Physics on the Horizon,

    D. Baumann and D. Green, “Equilateral Non-Gaussianity and New Physics on the Horizon,” JCAP 09 (2011) 014, arXiv:1102.5343 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Effective theories of single field inflation when heavy fields matter,

    A. Achucarro, J.-O. Gong, S. Hardeman, G. A. Palma, and S. P. Patil, “Effective theories of single field inflation when heavy fields matter,” JHEP 05 (2012) 066, arXiv:1201.6342 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  86. [94]

    The Effective Field Theory of Inflation,

    C. Cheung, P. Creminelli, A. L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan, and L. Senatore, “The Effective Field Theory of Inflation,” JHEP 03 (2008) 014, arXiv:0709.0293 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Revisiting non-Gaussianity in multifield inflation with curved field space,

    S. Garcia-Saenz, L. Pinol, and S. Renaux-Petel, “Revisiting non-Gaussianity in multifield inflation with curved field space,” arXiv:1907.10403 [hep-th]

    1907 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Seeing Higher-Dimensional Grand Unification In Primordial Non-Gaussianities,

    S. Kumar and R. Sundrum, “Seeing Higher-Dimensional Grand Unification In Primordial Non-Gaussianities,” JHEP 04 (2019) 120, arXiv:1811.11200 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Large-Field Inflation and the Cosmological Collider,

    M. Reece, L.-T. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu, “Large-Field Inflation and the Cosmological Collider,” arXiv:2204.11869 [hep-ph]. 43

    arXiv

  90. [98]

    Continuous spectrum on cosmological collider,

    S. Aoki, “Continuous spectrum on cosmological collider,” JCAP 04 (2023) 002, arXiv:2301.07920 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Compact scalars at the cosmological collider,

    P. Chakraborty and J. Stout, “Compact scalars at the cosmological collider,” JHEP 03 (2024) 149, arXiv:2311.09219 [hep-th]. 44

    2024 arXiv

  92. [2022]

    arXiv:2203.08121 [hep-th]. 39

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.