Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 1 minor 2 cited by

Exploring the statistical anisotropy of primordial curvature perturbations with pulsar timing arrays

T0 review · 2 major / 1 minor · reviewed 2026-05-09 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A dipole anisotropy in the primordial curvature power spectrum generates dipolar and quadrupolar patterns in scalar-induced gravitational waves observed by pulsar timing arrays.

desk verdict The paper derives frequency-dependent ORFs for dipole anisotropy in SIGW spectra and applies them to NANOGrav data, but the resulting g≲0.5 limit is weak and rests on the model-dependent choice that the observed band lies below the spectral peak. read the letter →

arxiv 2604.21642 v1 submitted 2026-04-23 gr-qc astro-ph.CO

Fengting Xie , Zhi-Chao Zhao , Qing-Hua Zhu , Xin Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qcastro-ph.CO
keywords primordialanisotropyscalar-inducedgravitationalwavespulsartimingarraysoverlapreductionfunctionsNANOGrav15-yeardipolestochasticearlyuniverse
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 examines how statistical anisotropy of dipole type in the early universe's curvature perturbations influences the stochastic background of scalar-induced gravitational waves. It establishes that this anisotropy produces both dipolar and quadrupolar variations in the wave energy density spectrum without creating additional polarization states. From this, frequency-dependent overlap reduction functions are calculated for pulsar timing arrays, showing stronger effects at smaller scales and dependence on the direction and pulsar sky distribution. Application to the NANOGrav 15-year observations reveals no clear preferred direction but sets an upper bound on the amplitude around 0.5. This work points to the value of expanded frequency coverage in upcoming PTA datasets for sharper tests of primordial anisotropy.

What carries the argument

Dipole-type statistical anisotropy in the primordial power spectrum that induces anisotropic energy density in scalar-induced gravitational waves and direction-dependent overlap reduction functions for pulsar timing arrays.

What would settle it

Detection of the predicted frequency-dependent dipolar and quadrupolar anisotropies in future PTA data at frequencies closer to or above the spectral peak, consistent with an amplitude g greater than 0.5, or the absence of any such signal across an extended frequency range would test the model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

We demonstrate that the primordial dipole induces both dipolar and quadrupolar anisotropies in the energy density spectrum of scalar-induced gravitational waves (SIGWs), without generating extra polarization modes. Based on this anisotropic spectrum, we derive the corresponding PTA overlap reduction functions (ORFs), which exhibit frequency dependence, with the anisotropies enhanced on small scales. Furthermore, owing to the non-uniform distribution of millisecond pulsars over the sky in current PTA dataset, the ORFs exhibit a morphology that explicitly depends on the preferred direction of the anisotropy. However, our bayesian analysis of the NANOGrav 15-year dataset still yields no sign

Load-bearing premise

The analysis relies on a phenomenological dipole parameterization of anisotropy in the primordial power spectrum and assumes that the PTA observational frequencies lie below the SIGW spectral peak where anisotropic contributions are suppressed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The overlap reduction functions for PTAs become frequency dependent.
  • Anisotropies are enhanced on small scales in the SIGW spectrum.
  • The specific form of the ORFs depends on the preferred direction of anisotropy and the distribution of pulsars.
  • Broader frequency coverage in future PTA observations will allow tighter constraints on the anisotropy amplitude.

Reading between the lines

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

  • This method provides a new probe of early universe directional preferences that could complement cosmic microwave background measurements of statistical anisotropy.
  • If a signal is detected at higher frequencies, it could distinguish between different models of inflation that break isotropy.
  • The current weak limits suggest that combining PTA data with other gravitational wave observatories might be necessary to fully test the phenomenological model.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper presents a phenomenological investigation of dipole-type statistical anisotropy in the primordial curvature power spectrum. It demonstrates that this induces both dipolar and quadrupolar anisotropies in the energy density spectrum of scalar-induced gravitational waves (SIGWs) without generating extra polarization modes, derives the corresponding frequency-dependent PTA overlap reduction functions (ORFs) that depend on the preferred direction due to non-uniform pulsar sky distribution, and performs a Bayesian analysis on the NANOGrav 15-year dataset. The analysis finds no significant evidence for a preferred direction and reports a weak upper limit g ≲ 0.5, which the authors attribute to the PTA frequency band lying below the SIGW spectral peak where anisotropic contributions are suppressed. The work highlights the potential for future PTA datasets with broader frequency coverage to improve constraints.

Significance. If the derivations of the anisotropic SIGW spectra and ORFs are correct, this provides a concrete framework for using PTA data to constrain primordial statistical anisotropies, with the frequency dependence and directional morphology of the ORFs offering testable predictions. The application to real NANOGrav data and the explicit discussion of observational limitations represent a strength, though the reported upper limit is conditional on the choice of scalar spectrum parameters.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Bayesian analysis section] Abstract and discussion of Bayesian results: The upper limit g ≲ 0.5 and lack of directional evidence are explicitly attributed to the NANOGrav frequency band lying below the SIGW spectral peak, where the kernel averages directions more isotropically and suppresses anisotropic contributions from the dipole term in P_ζ(k, n̂) = P0(k)[1 + g k̂·n̂]. However, the peak location is set by the free phenomenological parameter k* in the scalar spectrum, which is not independently constrained by the NANOGrav spectrum shape or other observables. Shifting k* so the peak enters the observed band would increase the directional modulation in the frequency-dependent ORFs and alter the posterior on g. The analysis should include robustness checks by varying k* or marginalizing over it to support the interpretation of the limit.
  2. [Section on ORF derivation] Derivation of anisotropic ORFs: The claim that the ORFs exhibit frequency dependence with anisotropies enhanced on small scales is central to the PTA predictions. The manuscript should provide explicit expressions or numerical examples showing how the directional integrals over the anisotropic P_ζ weighted by the SIGW kernel produce the dipolar/quadrupolar terms in Ω_GW(f) and the resulting ORF morphology, particularly for the non-uniform pulsar distribution.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'our models predict suppressed anisotropic contributions' without specifying the exact scalar spectrum form or kernel used; a brief equation or reference in the abstract or introduction would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments. We address each major comment below and agree to strengthen the paper with additional robustness checks and explicit derivations as requested.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and Bayesian analysis section] Abstract and discussion of Bayesian results: The upper limit g ≲ 0.5 and lack of directional evidence are explicitly attributed to the NANOGrav frequency band lying below the SIGW spectral peak, where the kernel averages directions more isotropically and suppresses anisotropic contributions from the dipole term in P_ζ(k, n̂) = P0(k)[1 + g k̂·n̂]. However, the peak location is set by the free phenomenological parameter k* in the scalar spectrum, which is not independently constrained by the NANOGrav spectrum shape or other observables. Shifting k* so the peak enters the observed band would increase the directional modulation in the frequency-dependent ORFs and alter the posterior on g. The analysis should include robustness checks by varying k* or marginalizing over it to support the interpretation of the limit.

    Authors: We agree that k* is a free phenomenological parameter whose value is not independently fixed by the NANOGrav data, and that our interpretation of the weak upper limit on g depends on the assumed location of the SIGW peak. To address this, we will add robustness checks in the revised manuscript by repeating the Bayesian analysis for several representative values of k* (both inside and outside the observed band) and by exploring marginalization over k* where computationally feasible. These results will be reported in an updated results section and discussion, with the abstract revised to qualify the interpretation accordingly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Section on ORF derivation] Derivation of anisotropic ORFs: The claim that the ORFs exhibit frequency dependence with anisotropies enhanced on small scales is central to the PTA predictions. The manuscript should provide explicit expressions or numerical examples showing how the directional integrals over the anisotropic P_ζ weighted by the SIGW kernel produce the dipolar/quadrupolar terms in Ω_GW(f) and the resulting ORF morphology, particularly for the non-uniform pulsar distribution.

    Authors: The manuscript already contains the derivation of the anisotropic Ω_GW(f) via directional integrals of the dipole-modulated P_ζ(k, n̂) against the SIGW kernel, leading to the dipolar and quadrupolar anisotropies that enter the frequency-dependent ORFs. To make this more transparent, we will insert the explicit integral expressions for the anisotropic contributions to Ω_GW(f) and add numerical examples (including plots) that illustrate the frequency dependence, the enhancement of anisotropies at higher frequencies, and the directional morphology induced by the actual NANOGrav pulsar sky distribution. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; derivation and data analysis remain independent

full rationale

The paper introduces a phenomenological parameterization of dipole anisotropy in the primordial spectrum, derives the resulting dipolar/quadrupolar anisotropies in the SIGW energy density and the associated frequency-dependent ORFs via standard kernel integrals, and then performs a separate Bayesian analysis on the external NANOGrav 15-year dataset to place an upper limit on the free parameter g. None of these steps reduce to their inputs by construction: the derivation follows from the chosen ansatz without tautology, the ORFs are computed outputs rather than renamed fits, and the reported limit g≲0.5 is the direct posterior result from fitting the data under the explicitly stated assumption that the PTA band lies below the scalar spectrum peak. The assumption itself is flagged by the authors as a limitation rather than smuggled in as a derived result. No self-citation chain or uniqueness theorem is invoked to force the central claims. This is a standard model-dependent constraint exercise with no load-bearing reduction to the inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a phenomenological parameterization of dipole anisotropy (amplitude g and direction) plus standard cosmological assumptions for scalar-induced gravitational wave generation and PTA response. No new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • g = ≲0.5
    Amplitude of the dipole anisotropy in the primordial power spectrum, with data-derived upper limit ≲0.5.
  • preferred direction
    Direction of the anisotropy, with no significant evidence found in the data.
assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions for the generation of scalar-induced gravitational waves from primordial curvature perturbations.
    Invoked throughout the phenomenological framework for the SIGW energy density spectrum.
  • domain assumption The stochastic gravitational wave background in the PTA band is dominated by scalar-induced contributions.
    Basis for using the SIGW spectrum to derive anisotropies and ORFs.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exploring the statistical anisotropy of primordial curvature perturbations with pulsar timing arrays." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2604.21642

@misc{pith2026260421642,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exploring the statistical anisotropy of primordial curvature perturbations with pulsar timing arrays},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2604.21642}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2604.21642}
}
abstract

The recent detection of a stochastic gravitational wave background by pulsar timing arrays has opened a new window in understanding supermassive black hole binaries and in probing the universe at the early time. Recently, pulsar timing array (PTA) collaborations have been further paving the way to probe anisotropies in the stochastic gravitational wave background. This study investigates dipole-type statistical anisotropy in the primordial power spectrum within a phenomenological framework. We demonstrate that the primordial dipole induces both dipolar and quadrupolar anisotropies in the energy density spectrum of scalar-induced gravitational waves (SIGWs), without generating extra polarization modes. Based on this anisotropic spectrum, we derive the corresponding PTA overlap reduction functions (ORFs), which exhibit frequency dependence, with the anisotropies enhanced on small scales. Furthermore, owing to the non-uniform distribution of millisecond pulsars over the sky in current PTA dataset, the ORFs exhibit a morphology that explicitly depends on the preferred direction of the anisotropy. However, our bayesian analysis of the NANOGrav 15-year dataset still yields no significant evidence for a preferred direction and a weak upper limit on anisotropy amplitude $(g\lesssim0.5)$. This result arises because the observational frequency band lies below the spectral peak, where our models predict suppressed anisotropic contributions. This limitation highlights the potential of future PTA observations. Specifically, datasets with broader frequency coverage are expected to tighten constraints on dipole-type anisotropy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.21642 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The scale-weighted function Wn(k) as function of scale k (left panel) and anisotropy magnitude g (right panel). The n = 0, 1, and 2 represent the isotropic part, dipole anisotropic part and quadrupole anisotropic part, respectively. where dimensionless power spectrum is given by P λλ h (k) = (k 3/2π 2 )P λλ h (k), and Peff(k) = k 3 2π 2 X 2 m=0 g mHm(k) , (13) Ω(k, ˆk, d) = X 2 n=0 ( ˆd · ˆk) nWn(k) . (14) The scale… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Effective energy density fraction of SIGWs in the presence of statistical anisotropy of primordial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overlap reduction functions for dipole (left panel) and quadrupole (right panel) anisotropies of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The typical configurations of the pulsar pairs relative to the preferred direction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The deformed Hellings-Downs curves due to the dipolar anisotropy in primordial power [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The deformed Hellings-Downs curves with g = 1 on the scale of k/k∗ = 1.5 for selected direction of ˆd. The scatter points represent the ORFs as function of the angular separation of pulsar pairs, which consist of 67 millisecond pulsars used by NANOGrav [130]. ˆd-depend…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The posterior distributions of our model parameters of SIGWs with the dipole statistical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of the posterior distributions of the anisotropic SIGWs and the isotropic SIGWs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. Scalar-induced gravitational waves from inflation with symmetry breaking

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Late gauge-field excitation in charged symmetry-breaking inflation pushes enhanced SIGWs into the GHz band, where longitudinal and charge-mixing parameters reshape the spectrum in opposite, distinguishable ways.

  2. Inflation with vector fields revisited: non-Gaussianities

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    In kinetically coupled vector inflation, the bispectrum in the large-h regime exhibits competing local and flattened non-Gaussian signals with distinct h scalings that distinguish vector-supported dynamics.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

131 extracted references · 131 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    M., et al

    G. Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.951(2023), 10.3847/2041-8213/acdac6, arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acdac6 2023

  2. [2]

    The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array III. Search for gravitational wave signals

    J. Antoniadiset al.(EPTA, InPTA:), Astron. Astrophys.678, A50 (2023), arXiv:2306.16214 [astro- ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    D. J. Reardonet al., Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L6 (2023), arXiv:2306.16215 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Searching for the nano-Hertz stochastic gravitational wave background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I

    H. Xuet al., Res. Astron. Astrophys.23, 075024 (2023), arXiv:2306.16216 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Constraints on Supermassive Black Hole Binaries from the Gravitational Wave Background

    G. Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.952, L37 (2023), arXiv:2306.16220 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Bayesian Limits on Gravitational Waves from Individual Supermassive Black Hole Binaries

    G. Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L50 (2023), arXiv:2306.16222 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    arXiv , author =:2306.16221 , journal =

    G. Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.956, L3 (2023), arXiv:2306.16221 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array: IV. Implications for massive black holes, dark matter and the early Universe

    J. Antoniadiset al.(EPTA, InPTA), Astron. Astrophys.685, A94 (2024), arXiv:2306.16227 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

Show all 131 references
  1. [9]

    Agazieet al., Astrophys

    G. Agazieet al., Astrophys. J. Lett.978, L29 (2025), arXiv:2408.10166 [astro-ph.HE]

    2025

  2. [10]

    Agazieet al., (2026), arXiv:2601.09481 [astro-ph.HE]

    G. Agazieet al., (2026), arXiv:2601.09481 [astro-ph.HE]

    2026

  3. [11]

    C. M. F. Mingarelli, T. J. W. Lazio, A. Sesana, J. E. Greene, J. A. Ellis, C.-P. Ma, S. Croft, S. Burke- Spolaor, and S. R. Taylor, Nature Astron.1, 886 (2017), arXiv:1708.03491 [astro-ph.GA]

    2017

  4. [12]

    Sato-Polito and M

    G. Sato-Polito and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. D109, 123544 (2024), arXiv:2305.05690 [astro- ph.CO]

    2024

  5. [13]

    Grimm, M

    N. Grimm, M. Pijnenburg, G. Cusin, and C. Bonvin, JCAP03, 011 (2025), arXiv:2404.05670 [astro- ph.CO]

    2025

  6. [14]

    Lemke, A

    A.-M. Lemke, A. Mitridate, and K. A. Gersbach, Phys. Rev. D111, 063068 (2025), arXiv:2407.08705 [astro-ph.HE]. 20

    2025

  7. [15]

    Q. Yang, X. Guo, Z. Cao, X. Shao, and X. Yuan, Astrophys. J.989, 157 (2025), arXiv:2408.05043 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  8. [16]

    Olmez, V

    S. Olmez, V. Mandic, and X. Siemens, JCAP07, 009 (2012), arXiv:1106.5555 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012

  9. [17]

    Kuroyanagi, K

    S. Kuroyanagi, K. Takahashi, N. Yonemaru, and H. Kumamoto, Phys. Rev. D95, 043531 (2017), arXiv:1604.00332 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017

  10. [18]

    A. C. Jenkins and M. Sakellariadou, Phys. Rev. D98, 063509 (2018), arXiv:1802.06046 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018

  11. [19]

    Geller, A

    M. Geller, A. Hook, R. Sundrum, and Y. Tsai, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 201303 (2018), arXiv:1803.10780 [hep-ph]

    2018

  12. [20]

    Liu, R.-G

    J. Liu, R.-G. Cai, and Z.-K. Guo, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 141303 (2021), arXiv:2010.03225 [astro- ph.CO]

    2021

  13. [21]

    Y. Li, F. P. Huang, X. Wang, and X. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D105, 083527 (2022), arXiv:2112.01409 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022

  14. [22]

    Ota, Phys

    A. Ota, Phys. Rev. D101, 103511 (2020), arXiv:2001.00409 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020

  15. [23]

    Zhang, J.-Z

    X. Zhang, J.-Z. Zhou, and Z. Chang, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 781 (2022), arXiv:2208.12948 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022

  16. [24]

    Chen and A

    C. Chen and A. Ota, Phys. Rev. D106, 063507 (2022), arXiv:2205.07810 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022

  17. [25]

    Kuang, J.-Z

    Y.-T. Kuang, J.-Z. Zhou, D. Wu, and Z. Chang, (2023), arXiv:2309.06676 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023

  18. [26]

    J.-P. Li, S. Wang, Z.-C. Zhao, and K. Kohri, JCAP10, 056 (2023), arXiv:2305.19950 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023

  19. [27]

    Yu and S

    Y.-H. Yu and S. Wang, Phys. Rev. D109, 083501 (2024), arXiv:2310.14606 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024

  20. [28]

    Mukherjee, H

    D. Mukherjee, H. V. Ragavendra, and S. K. Sethi, Phys. Rev. D113, 023533 (2026), arXiv:2506.23798 [astro-ph.CO]

    2026

  21. [29]

    Luo, Y.-H

    D. Luo, Y.-H. Yu, J.-P. Li, and S. Wang, JCAP04, 085 (2025), arXiv:2501.02965 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  22. [30]

    J.-P. Li, S. Wang, Z.-C. Zhao, and K. Kohri, (2025), arXiv:2505.16820 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  23. [31]

    J.-P. Li, S. Wang, Z.-C. Zhao, and K. Kohri, JCAP05, 109 (2024), arXiv:2403.00238 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024

  24. [32]

    Vilenkin, Phys

    A. Vilenkin, Phys. Lett. B107, 47 (1981)

    1981

  25. [33]

    C. J. Hogan and M. J. Rees, Nature311, 109 (1984)

    1984

  26. [34]

    Vachaspati and A

    T. Vachaspati and A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D31, 3052 (1985)

    1985

  27. [35]

    Damour and A

    T. Damour and A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D71, 063510 (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0410222

    2005

  28. [36]

    J. J. Blanco-Pillado and K. D. Olum, Phys. Rev. D96, 104046 (2017), arXiv:1709.02693 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017

  29. [37]

    Ringeval and T

    C. Ringeval and T. Suyama, JCAP12, 027 (2017), arXiv:1709.03845 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017

  30. [38]

    Baeza-Ballesteros, E

    J. Baeza-Ballesteros, E. J. Copeland, D. G. Figueroa, and J. Lizarraga, Phys. Rev. D110, 043522 (2024), arXiv:2308.08456 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024

  31. [39]

    B. Fu, A. Ghoshal, and S. F. King, JHEP11, 071 (2023), arXiv:2306.07334 [hep-ph]

    2023

  32. [40]

    Qiu and Z.-H

    Z.-Y. Qiu and Z.-H. Yu, Chin. Phys. C47, 085104 (2023), arXiv:2304.02506 [hep-ph]

    2023

  33. [41]

    M. Li, J. Yu, and Z. Pan, Phys. Rev. D111, 023009 (2025), arXiv:2403.01846 [gr-qc]

    2025

  34. [42]

    Hu and K

    Y. Hu and K. Kamada, JCAP04, 044 (2025), arXiv:2501.18380 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  35. [43]

    C. J. Hogan, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.218, 629 (1986)

    1986

  36. [44]

    Barni, S

    G. Barni, S. Blasi, E. Madge, and M. Vanvlasselaer, JCAP03, 066 (2026), arXiv:2510.21439 [hep-ph]. 21

    2026

  37. [45]

    Chatrchyan, M

    A. Chatrchyan, M. C. D. Marsh, and C. Nikolis, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 041005 (2026), arXiv:2507.01191 [hep-ph]

    2026

  38. [46]

    Inomata, M

    K. Inomata, M. Kamionkowski, K. Kasai, and B. Shakya, Phys. Rev. D112, 083523 (2025), arXiv:2412.17912 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  39. [47]

    J. Shao, H. Mao, and M. Huang, Phys. Rev. D111, 023052 (2025), arXiv:2410.06780 [hep-ph]

    2025

  40. [48]

    C. Tian, X. Wang, and C. Bal´ azs, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 1091 (2025), arXiv:2409.14505 [hep-ph]

    2025

  41. [49]

    Niemi and T

    L. Niemi and T. V. I. Tenkanen, Phys. Rev. D111, 075034 (2025), arXiv:2408.15912 [hep-ph]

    2025

  42. [50]

    Jiang, F

    S. Jiang, F. P. Huang, and C. S. Li, Phys. Rev. D108, 063508 (2023), arXiv:2305.02218 [hep-ph]

    2023

  43. [51]

    Cai, S.-J

    R.-G. Cai, S.-J. Wang, and Z.-Y. Yuwen, Phys. Rev. D108, L021502 (2023), arXiv:2305.00074 [gr-qc]

    2023

  44. [52]

    J. Liu, L. Bian, R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo, and S.-J. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 051001 (2023), arXiv:2208.14086 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023

  45. [53]

    K. N. Ananda, C. Clarkson, and D. Wands, Phys. Rev. D75, 123518 (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0612013

    2007

  46. [54]

    Baumann, P

    D. Baumann, P. J. Steinhardt, K. Takahashi, and K. Ichiki, Phys. Rev. D76, 084019 (2007), arXiv:hep-th/0703290

    2007

  47. [55]

    J. R. Espinosa, D. Racco, and A. Riotto, JCAP09, 012 (2018), arXiv:1804.07732 [hep-ph]

    2018

  48. [56]

    Kohri and T

    K. Kohri and T. Terada, Phys. Rev. D97, 123532 (2018), arXiv:1804.08577 [gr-qc]

    2018

  49. [57]

    Sasaki, T

    M. Sasaki, T. Suyama, T. Tanaka, and S. Yokoyama, Class. Quant. Grav.35, 063001 (2018), arXiv:1801.05235 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018

  50. [58]

    Dom` enech, Universe7, 398 (2021), arXiv:2109.01398 [gr-qc]

    G. Dom` enech, Universe7, 398 (2021), arXiv:2109.01398 [gr-qc]

    2021

  51. [59]

    Yuan and Q.-G

    C. Yuan and Q.-G. Huang, iScience24, 102860 (2021), arXiv:2103.04739 [astro-ph.GA]

    2021

  52. [60]

    Dom` enech, S

    G. Dom` enech, S. Pi, A. Wang, and J. Wang, JCAP08, 054 (2024), arXiv:2402.18965 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024

  53. [61]

    Wang, Z.-C

    S. Wang, Z.-C. Zhao, and Q.-H. Zhu, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013207 (2024), arXiv:2307.03095 [astro- ph.CO]

    2024

  54. [62]

    Z.-C. Chen, J. Li, L. Liu, and Z. Yi, Phys. Rev. D109, L101302 (2024), arXiv:2401.09818 [gr-qc]

    2024

  55. [63]

    Z.-C. Chen, C. Yuan, and Q.-G. Huang, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 25 (2020), arXiv:1910.12239 [astro- ph.CO]

    2020

  56. [64]

    Yuan, Z.-C

    C. Yuan, Z.-C. Chen, and Q.-G. Huang, Phys. Rev. D100, 8 (2019), arXiv:1906.11549 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019

  57. [65]

    Aghanimet al.(Planck), Astron

    N. Aghanimet al.(Planck), Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020

  58. [66]

    Nakama and T

    T. Nakama and T. Suyama, Phys. Rev. D92, 121304 (2015), arXiv:1506.05228 [gr-qc]

    2015

  59. [67]

    Afzalet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys

    A. Afzalet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.951(2023), 10.3847/2041-8213/acdc91, arXiv:2306.16219 [astro-ph.HE]

    2023 doi

  60. [68]

    Zhu, Z.-C

    Q.-H. Zhu, Z.-C. Zhao, S. Wang, and X. Zhang, Chin. Phys. C48, 125105 (2024), arXiv:2307.13574 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024

  61. [69]

    Harigaya, K

    K. Harigaya, K. Inomata, and T. Terada, Phys. Rev. D108, 123538 (2023), arXiv:2309.00228 [astro- ph.CO]. 22

    2023

  62. [70]

    De Luca, A

    V. De Luca, A. Kehagias, and A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. D108, 063531 (2023), arXiv:2307.13633 [astro- ph.CO]

    2023

  63. [71]

    Choudhury, K

    S. Choudhury, K. Dey, A. Karde, S. Panda, and M. Sami, Phys. Lett. B856, 138925 (2024), arXiv:2310.11034 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024

  64. [72]

    Wang, X.-H

    X. Wang, X.-H. Ma, and Y.-F. Cai, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D34, 2550027 (2025), arXiv:2412.19631 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  65. [73]

    Choudhury, K

    S. Choudhury, K. Dey, S. Ganguly, A. Karde, S. K. Singh, and P. Tiwari, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 472 (2025), arXiv:2409.18983 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  66. [74]

    Yu and S

    Y.-H. Yu and S. Wang, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68, 210412 (2025), arXiv:2405.02960 [astro- ph.CO]

    2025

  67. [75]

    Suyama and J

    T. Suyama and J. Yokoyama, Phys. Rev. D84, 083511 (2011), arXiv:1106.5983 [astro-ph.CO]

    2011

  68. [76]

    Y.-F. Cai, X. Tong, D.-G. Wang, and S.-F. Yan, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 081306 (2018), arXiv:1805.03639 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018

  69. [77]

    Y.-F. Cai, C. Chen, X. Tong, D.-G. Wang, and S.-F. Yan, Phys. Rev. D100, 043518 (2019), arXiv:1902.08187 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019

  70. [78]

    Cai, Z.-K

    R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo, J. Liu, L. Liu, and X.-Y. Yang, JCAP06, 013 (2020), arXiv:1912.10437 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020

  71. [79]

    ¨Ozsoy and G

    O. ¨Ozsoy and G. Tasinato, JCAP04, 048 (2020), arXiv:1912.01061 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020

  72. [80]

    Y.-F. Cai, J. Jiang, M. Sasaki, V. Vardanyan, and Z. Zhou, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 251301 (2021), arXiv:2105.12554 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021

  73. [81]

    J. M. Maldacena, JHEP05, 013 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0210603

    2003

  74. [82]

    C. T. Byrnes and K.-Y. Choi, Adv. Astron.2010, 724525 (2010), arXiv:1002.3110 [astro-ph.CO]

    2010

  75. [83]

    Dimastrogiovanni, N

    E. Dimastrogiovanni, N. Bartolo, S. Matarrese, and A. Riotto, Adv. Astron.2010, 752670 (2010), arXiv:1001.4049 [astro-ph.CO]

    2010

  76. [84]

    Adshead, C

    P. Adshead, C. Dvorkin, W. Hu, and E. A. Lim, Phys. Rev. D85, 023531 (2012), arXiv:1110.3050 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012

  77. [85]

    R.-g. Cai, S. Pi, and M. Sasaki, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 201101 (2019), arXiv:1810.11000 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019

  78. [86]

    Franciolini, A

    G. Franciolini, A. Iovino, Junior., V. Vaskonen, and H. Veermae, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 201401 (2023), arXiv:2306.17149 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023

  79. [87]

    M. A. Gorji, M. Sasaki, and T. Suyama, Phys. Lett. B846, 138214 (2023), arXiv:2307.13109 [astro- ph.CO]

    2023

  80. [88]

    Z.-C. Zhao, S. Wang, J.-P. Li, and K. Kohri, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 1406 (2025), arXiv:2412.02500 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  81. [89]

    J.-P. Li, S. Wang, Z.-C. Zhao, and K. Kohri, JCAP06, 039 (2024), arXiv:2309.07792 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024

  82. [90]

    Wang, Z.-C

    S. Wang, Z.-C. Zhao, J.-P. Li, and Q.-H. Zhu, Phys. Rev. Res.6, L012060 (2024), arXiv:2307.00572 [astro-ph.CO]. 23

    2024

  83. [91]

    Ackerman, S

    L. Ackerman, S. M. Carroll, and M. B. Wise, Phys. Rev. D75, 083502 (2007), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 80, 069901 (2009)], arXiv:astro-ph/0701357

    2007

  84. [92]

    Yokoyama and J

    S. Yokoyama and J. Soda, JCAP08, 005 (2008), arXiv:0805.4265 [astro-ph]

    2008

  85. [93]

    T. R. Dulaney and M. I. Gresham, Phys. Rev. D81, 103532 (2010), arXiv:1001.2301 [astro-ph.CO]

    2010

  86. [94]

    Maleknejad, M

    A. Maleknejad, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and J. Soda, Phys. Rept.528, 161 (2013), arXiv:1212.2921 [hep-th]

    2013

  87. [95]

    Soda, Class

    J. Soda, Class. Quant. Grav.29, 083001 (2012), arXiv:1201.6434 [hep-th]

    2012

  88. [96]

    Chen, B.-X

    C.-B. Chen, B.-X. An, and F.-W. Shu, Phys. Rev. D112, 10 (2025), arXiv:2507.16807 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  89. [97]

    Chang, M.-H

    Z. Chang, M.-H. Li, X. Li, and S. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C73, 2459 (2013), arXiv:1303.1593 [astro- ph.CO]

    2013

  90. [98]

    Chang, X

    Z. Chang, X. Li, and S. Wang, Chin. Phys. C39, 055101 (2015), arXiv:1307.4542 [astro-ph.CO]

    2015

  91. [99]

    Jain and P

    P. Jain and P. K. Rath, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 113 (2015), arXiv:1407.1714 [astro-ph.CO]

    2015

  92. [100]

    X. Li, S. Wang, and Z. Chang, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 260 (2015), arXiv:1502.02256 [gr-qc]

    2015

  93. [101]

    P. K. Rath, P. K. Aluri, and P. Jain, Phys. Rev. D91, 023515 (2015), arXiv:1403.2567 [astro-ph.CO]

    2015

  94. [102]

    Chang, P

    Z. Chang, P. K. Rath, Y. Sang, and D. Zhao, Res. Astron. Astrophys.18, 029 (2018), arXiv:1801.02773 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018

  95. [103]

    C. L. Bennettet al., Astrophys. J. Suppl.192, 17 (2011), arXiv:1001.4758 [astro-ph.CO]

    2011

  96. [104]

    P. A. R. Adeet al.(Planck), Astron. Astrophys.594, A16 (2016), arXiv:1506.07135 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016

  97. [105]

    Akramiet al.(Planck), Astron

    Y. Akramiet al.(Planck), Astron. Astrophys.641, A7 (2020), arXiv:1906.02552 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020

  98. [106]

    D. J. Eisensteinet al.(SDSS), Astrophys. J.633, 560 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0501171

    2005

  99. [107]

    J. E. Bautistaet al.(eBOSS), Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.500, 736 (2020), arXiv:2007.08993 [astro- ph.CO]

    2020

  100. [108]

    Houet al.(eBOSS), Mon

    J. Houet al.(eBOSS), Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.500, 1201 (2020), arXiv:2007.08998 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020

  101. [109]

    Andradeet al.(DESI), Phys

    U. Andradeet al.(DESI), Phys. Rev. D112, 083512 (2025), arXiv:2503.14742 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  102. [110]

    Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), Phys

    M. Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), Phys. Rev. D112, 083515 (2025), arXiv:2503.14738 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  103. [111]

    Abbottet al.(KAGRA, Virgo, LIGO Scientific), Phys

    R. Abbottet al.(KAGRA, Virgo, LIGO Scientific), Phys. Rev. D104, 022005 (2021), arXiv:2103.08520 [gr-qc]

    2021

  104. [112]

    Abbottet al.(KAGRA, Virgo, LIGO Scientific), Phys

    R. Abbottet al.(KAGRA, Virgo, LIGO Scientific), Phys. Rev. D104, 022004 (2021), arXiv:2101.12130 [gr-qc]

    2021

  105. [113]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), Phys. Rev. D100, 061101 (2019), arXiv:1903.02886 [gr-qc]

    2019

  106. [114]

    C. M. F. Mingarelli, T. Sidery, I. Mandel, and A. Vecchio, Phys. Rev. D88, 062005 (2013), arXiv:1306.5394 [astro-ph.HE]

    2013

  107. [115]

    S. R. Taylor and J. R. Gair, Phys. Rev. D88, 084001 (2013), arXiv:1306.5395 [gr-qc]

    2013

  108. [116]

    J. Gair, J. D. Romano, S. Taylor, and C. M. F. Mingarelli, Phys. Rev. D90, 082001 (2014), arXiv:1406.4664 [gr-qc]

    2014

  109. [117]

    J. D. Romano and N. J. Cornish, Living Rev. Rel.20, 2 (2017), arXiv:1608.06889 [gr-qc]. 24

    2017

  110. [118]

    N. Pol, S. R. Taylor, and J. D. Romano, Astrophys. J.940, 173 (2022), arXiv:2206.09936 [astro- ph.HE]

    2022

  111. [119]

    Wang and Z.-C

    S. Wang and Z.-C. Zhao, Phys. Rev. D109, L061502 (2024), arXiv:2307.04680 [astro-ph.HE]

    2024

  112. [120]

    Chenet al., Phys

    Y. Chenet al., Phys. Rev. D113, 043042 (2026), arXiv:2602.11529 [astro-ph.HE]

    2026

  113. [121]

    Cusin and G

    G. Cusin and G. Tasinato, JCAP08, 036 (2022), arXiv:2201.10464 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022

  114. [122]

    Chowdhury, G

    D. Chowdhury, G. Tasinato, and I. Zavala, Phys. Rev. D107, 083516 (2023), arXiv:2209.05770 [gr-qc]

    2023

  115. [123]

    Tasinato, Phys

    G. Tasinato, Phys. Rev. D108, 103521 (2023), arXiv:2309.00403 [gr-qc]

    2023

  116. [124]

    Heisenberg, H

    L. Heisenberg, H. Inchausp´ e, and D. Maibach, JCAP01, 044 (2025), arXiv:2401.14849 [gr-qc]

    2025

  117. [125]

    Mentasti, C

    G. Mentasti, C. R. Contaldi, and M. Peloso, JCAP02, 068 (2026), arXiv:2507.16901 [astro-ph.CO]

    2026

  118. [126]

    Maggiore,Gravitational Waves

    M. Maggiore,Gravitational Waves. Vol. 2: Astrophysics and Cosmology(Oxford University Press, 2018)

    2018

  119. [127]

    S. L. Detweiler, Astrophys. J.234, 1100 (1979)

    1979

  120. [128]

    R. w. Hellings and G. s. Downs, Astrophys. J. Lett.265, L39 (1983)

    1983

  121. [129]

    nanograv/discovery,

    M. Vallisneri, P. M. Meyers, D. Wright, A. D. Johnson, J. G. Baier, and R. van Haasteren, “nanograv/discovery,” (2025)

    2025

  122. [130]

    Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys

    G. Agazieet al.(NANOGrav), Astrophys. J. Lett.951, L9 (2023), arXiv:2306.16217 [astro-ph.HE]

    2023

  123. [131]

    Pi and M

    S. Pi and M. Sasaki, JCAP09, 037 (2020), arXiv:2005.12306 [gr-qc]

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed May 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.