pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.10148 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-11 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · gr-qc· hep-ph· hep-th

An Analytic Formalism of Inflation for Derivative Coupled Scalar Field and Validating its predictions for Some Inflationary Potentials

Aayush Randeep , Rajib Saha This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 16:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-phhep-th
keywords inflationnon-minimal couplingderivative couplingscalar spectral indextensor-to-scalar ratioslow-rollACTPlanck
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

A derivative coupling between the scalar field and Ricci tensor lets standard inflationary potentials produce ns and r values matching ACT and Planck data.

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

The paper develops an analytic treatment of inflation in a non-minimally coupled model where the scalar field couples to gravity through a covariant term involving the Ricci tensor and field derivatives. For power-law, exponential alpha-attractor, arctan, hilltop, and polynomial potentials, explicit calculations of the scalar spectral index ns and tensor-to-scalar ratio r are performed under the slow-roll approximation. These predictions fall inside the observationally allowed windows from recent ACT and Planck measurements. The higher-derivative contributions generated by the coupling remain free of singularities in the slow-roll regime. A reader cares because this shows that familiar, simple potentials remain viable once the coupling is included, without requiring new functional forms or fine-tuning.

Core claim

We construct an analytic formalism for inflation driven by a derivative-coupled scalar field whose action includes a term proportional to the covariant product of the Ricci tensor and the derivatives of the scalar field. When this formalism is applied to a range of standard potentials, the resulting expressions for the slow-roll parameters yield values of ns and r that lie within the bounds reported by ACT and Planck. The higher-derivative terms that appear from the coupling can be consistently handled without encountering singularities as long as the slow-roll conditions hold.

What carries the argument

The derivative coupling term in the action, which generates higher-derivative interactions between the scalar field and curvature and is analyzed by reducing the equations of motion under the slow-roll approximation to obtain explicit ns and r predictions.

If this is right

  • Each of the five classes of potentials (power law, exponential attractor, arctan, hilltop, polynomial) can simultaneously satisfy the current observational limits on ns and r.
  • The higher-derivative terms remain regular throughout slow-roll, preserving the standard inflationary dynamics.
  • The model supplies concrete, calculable predictions for the primordial power spectra that can be compared directly with CMB data.
  • No additional tuning of the potential is required beyond the usual slow-roll conditions to achieve observational consistency.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same coupling structure could be tested against future CMB-S4 or LiteBIRD constraints on the tensor spectrum to see whether it produces distinguishable running or non-Gaussianity.
  • If the coupling scale is related to the Planck mass, the formalism may impose new upper bounds on the inflaton mass or potential height that are independent of the minimal-coupling case.
  • The absence of singularities suggests the model might remain stable when extended to multi-field or non-canonical kinetic terms.

Load-bearing premise

The slow-roll regime remains valid for the entire inflationary phase and the higher-derivative contributions from the coupling produce no singularities or instabilities for the chosen potentials.

What would settle it

A future measurement that places ns and r outside the range produced by any of the listed potentials under this coupling, or an observation of singular behavior in the perturbation equations during the slow-roll phase.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.10148 by Aayush Randeep, Rajib Saha.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: 1-σ (dark) and 2-σ (light) likelihood contours in the ns − r plane. The red contours correspond to ACT + BK (BICEP/Keck) [73] constraints and the blue contours correspond to Planck + BK constraints [15] [16] [9]. The theoretical predictions of the NMDC model are shown for the power-law (n = 1 and n = 1/3), exponential α-attractor, Hilltop, arctan, and polynomial attractor potentials. Dots represent N = 50 … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

One of the fundamental objectives of contemporary cosmology is to understand the physics of the inflationary universe, owing to its observably verifiable predictions about the very early universe with an energy scale of $\sim 10^{16}$ GeV. Recent observations from the ACT and the Planck mission, constrain the values of the scalar spectral index, $n_s$, and the tensor-to-scalar ratio, with state-of-the-art accuracy and upper limits, respectively. In the current work, a type of non minimally coupled inflationary model in which the gravity and the background scalar field interact through a covariant product of the Ricci tensor and derivatives of the scalar field. With this interaction at the backdrop, we estimate $n_s$ and $r$ for a wide range of inflaton self-interaction potentials, including power law, exponential $\alpha$ attractor, Arctan, Hilltop, and polynomial model. We show that the higher derivative terms involving the scalar field resulting from the derivative coupling term can be handled without facing any singularity within the slow-roll regime. We show that it is possible to produce $n_s$ and $r$ values consistent with ACT and Planck observations for each of the chosen sets of potentials for the derivative coupled action.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops an analytic formalism for single-field inflation in a non-minimally coupled model where the scalar field derivatives couple covariantly to the Ricci tensor. Starting from the specified action, it derives slow-roll expressions for the scalar spectral index ns and tensor-to-scalar ratio r, then evaluates these for power-law, exponential α-attractor, arctan, hilltop, and polynomial potentials. The central claim is that the resulting higher-derivative terms remain free of singularities in the slow-roll regime and that parameter choices exist for which the predicted (ns, r) values lie inside the ACT and Planck 1σ/2σ contours.

Significance. If the derivations are free of hidden instabilities and the slow-roll trajectories are explicitly verified to be stable, the work supplies a new, analytically tractable class of derivative-coupled models that can accommodate current CMB data. The explicit treatment of multiple distinct potentials and the assertion of singularity-free evolution constitute concrete strengths that could be used for future model discrimination once the stability analysis is completed.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §3 (slow-roll derivation)] The abstract and introduction assert that 'the higher derivative terms involving the scalar field resulting from the derivative coupling term can be handled without facing any singularity within the slow-roll regime,' yet no explicit computation of the effective kinetic coefficient (the prefactor of the highest-order scalar derivative term after integration by parts) or its sign is provided for any of the five potentials. Without this check, the analytic expressions for ns and r rest on an unverified assumption that the Ostrogradsky ghost is absent and that the kinetic term remains positive-definite along the entire inflationary trajectory.
  2. [§4 (numerical results for each potential)] The reported agreement with ACT and Planck data is obtained by varying the coupling strength together with the potential parameters. The manuscript does not demonstrate that any of the (ns, r) predictions are parameter-free or that they constitute genuine forecasts rather than post-hoc fits; this weakens the claim that the formalism 'validates its predictions' for the chosen potentials.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] Notation for the coupling constant and the slow-roll parameters should be defined once at first use and used consistently; several equations reuse symbols without redefinition.
  2. [§4] The manuscript would benefit from a short table summarizing the best-fit coupling values and the resulting ns, r for each potential class, together with the corresponding Planck/ACT contours.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §3 (slow-roll derivation)] The abstract and introduction assert that 'the higher derivative terms involving the scalar field resulting from the derivative coupling term can be handled without facing any singularity within the slow-roll regime,' yet no explicit computation of the effective kinetic coefficient (the prefactor of the highest-order scalar derivative term after integration by parts) or its sign is provided for any of the five potentials. Without this check, the analytic expressions for ns and r rest on an unverified assumption that the Ostrogradsky ghost is absent and that the kinetic term remains positive-definite along the entire inflationary trajectory.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit verification of the effective kinetic coefficient and its sign is necessary to rigorously confirm the absence of Ostrogradsky ghosts. Although our general slow-roll derivation in §3 proceeds under the assumption that the higher-derivative contributions remain well-behaved, we did not tabulate the prefactor for each individual potential. In the revised manuscript we will add this computation for the power-law, α-attractor, arctan, hilltop and polynomial cases, showing that the coefficient stays positive throughout the slow-roll regime for the parameter choices we consider. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4 (numerical results for each potential)] The reported agreement with ACT and Planck data is obtained by varying the coupling strength together with the potential parameters. The manuscript does not demonstrate that any of the (ns, r) predictions are parameter-free or that they constitute genuine forecasts rather than post-hoc fits; this weakens the claim that the formalism 'validates its predictions' for the chosen potentials.

    Authors: The coupling strength is an intrinsic free parameter of the derivative-coupled action, so scanning it together with the potential parameters is the appropriate way to map the viable region of the model. The manuscript’s intent is to demonstrate that the analytic expressions for ns and r derived in §3 can yield values inside the observational contours for each of the five potentials, rather than to claim parameter-free forecasts. We will revise the abstract, introduction and §4 to make this distinction explicit and to replace the phrase “validates its predictions” with language that more accurately reflects an exploration of consistency within the model’s parameter space. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in derivation chain from action to ns/r observables

full rationale

The paper begins with a specified non-minimally derivative-coupled action, derives slow-roll parameters and analytic expressions for the scalar spectral index ns and tensor-to-scalar ratio r, then evaluates these expressions on standard potentials (power-law, exponential, arctan, hilltop, polynomial). Consistency with ACT/Planck bounds is shown via choice of potential parameters, which constitutes ordinary model validation rather than any reduction of the output to the input data or to self-citations. No self-definitional re-labeling, fitted quantities renamed as predictions, or load-bearing uniqueness theorems appear in the derivation steps. The formalism is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the slow-roll approximation being sufficient to eliminate higher-derivative singularities and on the assumption that the coupling strength can be chosen to match observations without additional constraints from quantum gravity or particle physics.

free parameters (2)
  • coupling strength
    The coefficient of the Ricci-derivative interaction term must be tuned to keep the model inside the slow-roll regime and to fit ns and r.
  • potential parameters
    Each potential (power-law index, alpha, hilltop height, etc.) contains at least one free parameter adjusted to reproduce the observed spectral index.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Slow-roll approximation holds throughout the relevant epoch
    Invoked to drop higher-derivative terms and obtain analytic expressions for ns and r.
  • standard math Standard Einstein-Hilbert gravity plus scalar field action with the stated derivative coupling
    The starting point of the model; no derivation from a more fundamental theory is provided.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5530 in / 1364 out tokens · 28208 ms · 2026-05-10T16:18:25.285168+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Alan H. Guth. Inflationary universe: A possible solution to the horizon and flatness problems.Physical Review D, 23(2):347–356, 1981

    work page 1981

  2. [2]

    Liddle and David H

    Andrew R. Liddle and David H. Lyth.Cosmological Inflation and Large-Scale Struc- ture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000

    work page 2000

  3. [3]

    Encyclopædia Inflation- aris.Phys

    J´ erˆ ome Martin, Christophe Ringeval, and Vincent Vennin. Encyclopædia Inflation- aris.Phys. Dark Univ., 5-6:75–235, 2014. [Phys.Dark Univ.5-6,75(2014)]

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    Cl´ audio Gomes, Orfeu Bertolami, and Jo˜ ao G. Rosa. Inflation with Planck: a survey of some ¨ exotic¨ ınflationary models.Phys. Rev. D, 97(10):1–9, 2018. arXiv:1803.08084v1 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    Inflationary Cosmology: From Theory to Observations

    J. Alberto V´ azquez, Luis E. Padilla, and Tonatiuh Matos. Inflationary Cosmology: From Theory to Observations.Rev. Mex. Fis. E, 17:1–?, 2021. arXiv:1810.09934v3 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Cosmology with nonminimal derivative couplings.Physics Letters B, 301:175–182, 1993

    Luca Amendola. Cosmology with nonminimal derivative couplings.Physics Letters B, 301:175–182, 1993

    work page 1993

  7. [7]

    Germani and A

    C. Germani and A. Kehagias. New model of inflation with non-minimal derivative coupling of standard model higgs boson to gravity.Phys. Rev. Lett., 105:011302, 2010

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    Planck 2018 results

    Planck Collaboration. Planck 2018 results. x. constraints on inflation.Astron. As- trophys., 641:A10, 2020

    work page 2018

  9. [9]

    The atacama cosmology telescope: Dr6 constraints on extended cosmological models, 2025

    Erminia Calabrese et al. The atacama cosmology telescope: Dr6 constraints on extended cosmological models, 2025

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    Cosmological dynamics with non-minimally coupled scalar field and a constant potential function.JCAP, 11(039), 2015

    Orest Hrycyna and Marek Szydlowski. Cosmological dynamics with non-minimally coupled scalar field and a constant potential function.JCAP, 11(039), 2015. v2, 10 Nov 2015

    work page 2015

  11. [11]

    Nonminimal coupling and inflationary attractors.Physical Review D, 94(10), November 2016

    Zhu Yi and Yungui Gong. Nonminimal coupling and inflationary attractors.Physical Review D, 94(10), November 2016

    work page 2016

  12. [12]

    Capozziello, G

    S. Capozziello, G. Lambiase, and H.-J. Schmidt. Nonminimal derivative couplings and inflation in generalized theories of gravity.Annalen Phys., 9:39–48, 2000. v1 submitted 15 Jun 1999

    work page 2000

  13. [13]

    Observational constraints on inflationary models with non-minimally derivative coupling

    Qing Gao, Yanjiang Qian, Yungui Gong, and Zhu Yi. Observational constraints on inflationary models with non-minimally derivative coupling. 2025

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Quiros and A

    I. Quiros and A. Kumar. Active and passive conformal transformations in scalar- tensor gravity.arXiv preprint, 2025. submitted 11 Oct 2025. 16

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Qu, Blake Sherwin, Cristobal Sifon, Alexander van Engelen, and Edward J

    Carmen Embil Villagra, Gerrit Farren, Giulio Fabbian, Boris Bolliet, Irene Abril- Cabezas, David Alonso, Anthony Challinor, Jo Dunkley, Joshua Kim, Niall Mac- Crann, Fiona McCarthy, Kavilan Moodley, Frank J. Qu, Blake Sherwin, Cristobal Sifon, Alexander van Engelen, and Edward J. Wollack. The atacama cosmology tele- scope: High-redshift measurement of str...

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    The atacama cosmology telescope: Dr6 power spectra, likeli- hoods andλcdm parameters, 2025

    Thibaut Louis et al. The atacama cosmology telescope: Dr6 power spectra, likeli- hoods andλcdm parameters, 2025

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    Cosmological constraints from the atacama cosmology telescope

    ACT Collaboration. Cosmological constraints from the atacama cosmology telescope. Phys. Rev. D, 2023

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    High-precision cmb temperature and polarization measurements

    ACT Collaboration. High-precision cmb temperature and polarization measurements. JCAP, 2023

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    M. A. Abdul-Karim and DESI Collaboration. Data release 1 of the dark energy spectroscopic instrument (desi).arXiv e-prints, 2025

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    Semenaite, C

    A. Semenaite, C. Blake, A. Porredon, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, D. Bianchi, D. Brooks, ..., and H. Zou. Joint cosmological fits to desi-dr1 full-shape clustering and weak gravitational lensing in configuration space.arXiv e-prints, 2025

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    Atacama cosmology telescope, south pole telescope, and chaotic inflation.Phys

    Renata Kallosh, Andrei Linde, and Diederik Roest. Atacama cosmology telescope, south pole telescope, and chaotic inflation.Phys. Rev. Lett., 135(16):161001, 2025. Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 161001 (2025)

    work page 2025

  22. [22]

    Improved constraints on the scalar spectral index.Phys

    Author et al. Improved constraints on the scalar spectral index.Phys. Rev. D, 20XX

    work page

  23. [23]

    f(r) theories.Living Reviews in Relativity, 13:3, 2010

    Antonio De Felice and Shinji Tsujikawa. f(r) theories.Living Reviews in Relativity, 13:3, 2010

    work page 2010

  24. [24]

    Germani and Y

    C. Germani and Y. Watanabe. Uv-protected inflation.JCAP, 07:031, 2011

    work page 2011

  25. [25]

    Horndeski

    Gregory W. Horndeski. Second-order scalar-tensor field equations in a four- dimensional space.International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 10:363–384, 1974

    work page 1974

  26. [26]

    Encyclopaedia inflation- aris.Physics of the Dark Universe, 5–6:75–235, 2014

    J´ erˆ ome Martin, Christophe Ringeval, and Vincent Vennin. Encyclopaedia inflation- aris.Physics of the Dark Universe, 5–6:75–235, 2014

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    Monodromy in the cmb: Gravity waves and string inflation.Physical Review D, 78:106003, 2008

    Eva Silverstein and Alexander Westphal. Monodromy in the cmb: Gravity waves and string inflation.Physical Review D, 78:106003, 2008

    work page 2008

  28. [28]

    De Felice and S

    A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa. f(r) theories.Living Rev. Rel., 13:3, 2010

    work page 2010

  29. [30]

    Bartlett, Harry Desmond, and Pedro G

    Tom´ as Sousa, Deaglan J. Bartlett, Harry Desmond, and Pedro G. Ferreira. Optimal Inflationary Potentials.Phys. Rev. D, 109:083524, 2024. arXiv:2310.16786v2 [astro- ph.CO]. 17

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [31]

    Starobinsky

    Alexei A. Starobinsky. A new type of isotropic cosmological models without singu- larity.Physics Letters B, 91:99–102, 1980

    work page 1980

  31. [32]

    Carl Brans and Robert H. Dicke. Mach’s principle and a relativistic theory of gravi- tation.Physical Review, 124:925–935, 1961

    work page 1961

  32. [33]

    Odintsov

    Shin’ichi Nojiri and Sergei D. Odintsov. Modified gauss–bonnet theory as gravita- tional alternative for dark energy.Physics Letters B, 631:1–6, 2005

    work page 2005

  33. [34]

    Die grundlage der allgemeinen relativit¨ atstheorie.Annalen der Physik, 354(7):769–822, 1916

    Albert Einstein. Die grundlage der allgemeinen relativit¨ atstheorie.Annalen der Physik, 354(7):769–822, 1916

    work page 1916

  34. [35]

    Armendariz-Picon, T

    C. Armendariz-Picon, T. Damour, and V. F. Mukhanov. k-inflation.Physics Letters B, 458:209–218, 1999

    work page 1999

  35. [36]

    Lyth and David Wands

    David H. Lyth and David Wands. Generating the curvature perturbation without an inflaton.Physics Letters B, 524:5–14, 2002

    work page 2002

  36. [37]

    Smoot, Charles L

    George F. Smoot, Charles L. Bennett, Alan Kogut, Edward L. Wright, Joseph Ay- mon, Nancy W. Boggess, Edward S. Cheng, G. De Amici, Samuel Gulkis, Martin G. Hauser, et al. Structure in the cobe differential microwave radiometer first-year maps. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 396:L1–L5, 1992

    work page 1992

  37. [38]

    Bennett, Anthony J

    Charles L. Bennett, Anthony J. Banday, Krzysztof M. G´ orski, Gary Hinshaw, Pe- ter D. Jackson, Alan Kogut, George F. Smoot, and Edward L. Wright. Four-year cobe dmr cosmic microwave background observations: Maps and basic results.The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 464:L1–L4, 1996

    work page 1996

  38. [39]

    Mather, Dale J

    John C. Mather, Dale J. Fixsen, Richard A. Shafer, Carol Mosier, and David T. Wilkinson. Measurement of the cosmic microwave background spectrum by the cobe firas instrument.The Astrophysical Journal, 420:439–444, 1994

    work page 1994

  39. [40]

    Spergel, Licia Verde, Hiranya V

    David N. Spergel, Licia Verde, Hiranya V. Peiris, Eiichiro Komatsu, Michael R. Nolta, Charles L. Bennett, Mark Halpern, Gary Hinshaw, Norman Jarosik, Alan Kogut, et al. First-year wilkinson microwave anisotropy probe (wmap) observations: Determination of cosmological parameters.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 148:175–194, 2003

    work page 2003

  40. [41]

    Nolta, Charles L

    Eiichiro Komatsu, Joanna Dunkley, Michael R. Nolta, Charles L. Bennett, Bennett Gold, Gary Hinshaw, Norman Jarosik, David Larson, Michele Limon, Lyman Page, et al. Five-year wilkinson microwave anisotropy probe observations: Cosmological interpretation.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 180:330–376, 2009

    work page 2009

  41. [42]

    Smith, Joanna Dunkley, Charles L

    Eiichiro Komatsu, Kent M. Smith, Joanna Dunkley, Charles L. Bennett, Bennett Gold, Gary Hinshaw, Norman Jarosik, David Larson, Michael R. Nolta, Lyman Page, et al. Seven-year wilkinson microwave anisotropy probe (wmap) observations: Cosmological interpretation.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 192:18, 2011. 18

    work page 2011

  42. [43]

    Spergel, Charles L

    Gary Hinshaw, David Larson, Eiichiro Komatsu, David N. Spergel, Charles L. Ben- nett, Joanna Dunkley, Michael R. Nolta, Mark Halpern, Robert S. Hill, Nils Odegard, et al. Nine-year wilkinson microwave anisotropy probe (wmap) observations: Cos- mological parameter results.The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 208:19, 2013

    work page 2013

  43. [44]

    Kosmologische betrachtungen zur allgemeinen relativit¨ atstheorie

    Albert Einstein. Kosmologische betrachtungen zur allgemeinen relativit¨ atstheorie. Sitzungsberichte der K¨ oniglich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, pages 142–152, 1917

    work page 1917

  44. [45]

    Aghanim, Y

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, et al. Planck 2018 results. vi. cos- mological parameters.Astronomy & Astrophysics, 641:A6, 2020

    work page 2018

  45. [46]

    P. J. E. Peebles and Bharat Ratra. The cosmological constant and dark energy. Reviews of Modern Physics, 75:559–606, 2003

    work page 2003

  46. [47]

    Rubin, W

    Vera C. Rubin, W. Kent Jr. Ford, and Norbert Thonnard. Rotational properties of 21 sc galaxies with a large range of luminosities and radii.The Astrophysical Journal, 238:471–487, 1980

    work page 1980

  47. [48]

    Die rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen nebeln.Helvetica Physica Acta, 6:110–127, 1933

    Fritz Zwicky. Die rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen nebeln.Helvetica Physica Acta, 6:110–127, 1933

    work page 1933

  48. [49]

    Riess, Alexei V

    Adam G. Riess, Alexei V. Filippenko, Peter Challis, et al. Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant.The As- tronomical Journal, 116:1009–1038, 1998

    work page 1998

  49. [50]

    Measurements of omega and lambda from 42 high-redshift supernovae.The Astrophysical Journal, 517:565– 586, 1999

    Saul Perlmutter, Greg Aldering, Gerson Goldhaber, et al. Measurements of omega and lambda from 42 high-redshift supernovae.The Astrophysical Journal, 517:565– 586, 1999

    work page 1999

  50. [51]

    Andrei D. Linde. A new inflationary universe scenario.Physics Letters B, 108:389– 393, 1982

    work page 1982

  51. [52]

    Carroll.Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity

    Sean M. Carroll.Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity. Addison-Wesley, 2004

    work page 2004

  52. [53]

    Wald.General Relativity

    Robert M. Wald.General Relativity. University of Chicago Press, 1984

    work page 1984

  53. [54]

    John Wiley & Sons, 1972

    Steven Weinberg.Gravitation and Cosmology. John Wiley & Sons, 1972

    work page 1972

  54. [55]

    Liddle, Paul Parsons, and John D

    Andrew R. Liddle, Paul Parsons, and John D. Barrow. Formalizing the slow-roll approximation in inflation.Physical Review D, 50(12):7222–7232, December 1994

    work page 1994

  55. [56]

    Springer US, Boston, MA, 1993

    Konrad Rudnicki.Cosmological Principles, pages 169–175. Springer US, Boston, MA, 1993

    work page 1993

  56. [57]

    Inflationary models with non- minimally derivative coupling.Classical and Quantum Gravity, 33(20):205001, 2016

    Nan Yang, Qin Fei, Qing Gao, and Yungui Gong. Inflationary models with non- minimally derivative coupling.Classical and Quantum Gravity, 33(20):205001, 2016. 19

    work page 2016

  57. [58]

    Introduction to the number of e-folds in slow-roll inflation.Universe, 10(7):284, June 2024

    Alessandro Di Marco, Emanuele Orazi, and Gianfranco Pradisi. Introduction to the number of e-folds in slow-roll inflation.Universe, 10(7):284, June 2024

    work page 2024

  58. [59]

    Andrei D. Linde. Chaotic inflation.Physics Letters B, 129:177–181, 1983

    work page 1983

  59. [60]

    Andrei D. Linde. Chaotic inflation.Physics Letters B, 129(3-4):177–181, 1983

    work page 1983

  60. [61]

    Gangopadhyay, and Anshuman Maharana

    Sukannya Bhattacharya, Koushik Dutta, Mayukh R. Gangopadhyay, and Anshuman Maharana. alpha-attractor inflation: Models and predictions.Physical Review D, 107(10), May 2023

    work page 2023

  61. [62]

    Universality class in conformal inflation.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2013(07):002, 2013

    Renata Kallosh and Andrei Linde. Universality class in conformal inflation.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2013(07):002, 2013

    work page 2013

  62. [63]

    Inflation as a transient attractor inr 2 cosmology.Physical Review D, 37(4):858–882, 1988

    Ken-Ichi Maeda. Inflation as a transient attractor inr 2 cosmology.Physical Review D, 37(4):858–882, 1988

    work page 1988

  63. [64]

    Coule and Milan B

    David H. Coule and Milan B. Mijic. Quantum fluctuations and eternal inflation in ther 2 model.International Journal of Modern Physics A, 3(3):617–629, 1988

    work page 1988

  64. [65]

    Fourth-order gravity as general relativity plus matter.Physics Letters B, 145:176–178, 1984

    Bill Whitt. Fourth-order gravity as general relativity plus matter.Physics Letters B, 145:176–178, 1984

    work page 1984

  65. [66]

    Quantum cosmological perturbations: Predictions and ob- servations.European Physical Journal C, 73:2486, 2013

    Viatcheslav Mukhanov. Quantum cosmological perturbations: Predictions and ob- servations.European Physical Journal C, 73:2486, 2013

    work page 2013

  66. [67]

    Lotfi Boubekeur and David H. Lyth. Hilltop inflation.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, (07):010, 2005

    work page 2005

  67. [68]

    Unity of cosmo- logical inflation attractors.Physical Review Letters, 114:141302, 2015

    Marco Galante, Renata Kallosh, Andrei Linde, and Diederik Roest. Unity of cosmo- logical inflation attractors.Physical Review Letters, 114:141302, 2015

    work page 2015

  68. [69]

    D. G. Boulware and S. Deser. Inconsistency of finite range gravitation.Phys. Lett. B, 40:227–229, 1972

    work page 1972

  69. [70]

    Starobinsky inflation with a quadratic weyl tensor.Phys

    Antonio De Felice, Lavinia Heisenberg, Shinji Tsujikawa, and Shinji Mukohyama. Starobinsky inflation with a quadratic weyl tensor.Phys. Rev. D, 108:124031, 2023

    work page 2023

  70. [71]

    Cosmology of a higher derivative scalar theory with non-minimal maxwell coupling.Eur

    Shahab Shahidi and Zahra Haghani. Cosmology of a higher derivative scalar theory with non-minimal maxwell coupling.Eur. Phys. J. C, 79:509, 2019

    work page 2019

  71. [72]

    Drees and Y

    Manuel Drees and Yong Xu. Refined predictions for starobinsky inflation and post- inflationary constraints in light of act.arXiv preprint, 2025. arXiv:2504.20757 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  72. [73]

    BICEP, Keck Collaboration, P. A. R. Ade et al., 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]. 20

    work page arXiv 2018