pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.19336 · v1 · pith:WOXCNTLJnew · submitted 2026-05-19 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · gr-qc

Recombination Thickness as an Uncertainty in Inflationary Observables

V.K. Oikonomou This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 04:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO gr-qc
keywords inflationCMBrecombinationprimordial power spectrumspectral indexTT EE differencesmoothinginflationary observables
0
0 comments X p. Extension
pith:WOXCNTLJ Add to your LaTeX paper What is a Pith Number? 
\usepackage{pith}
\pithnumber{WOXCNTLJ}

Prints a linked pith:WOXCNTLJ badge after your title and writes the identifier into PDF metadata. Compiles on arXiv with no extra files. Learn more

The pith

The finite duration of recombination introduces Gaussian smoothing to the primordial power spectrum, producing a non-zero difference between spectral indices inferred from TT and EE data.

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

The paper establishes that the finite thickness of the recombination era turns the usual deterministic mapping from CMB multipoles to primordial wavenumbers into a probabilistic one. This is modeled by elevating the power spectrum to a distribution blurred by a Gaussian in ln k whose width is set by the recombination duration divided by the angular diameter distance to last scattering. The smoothing leaves standard power-law inflation unchanged but modifies the extracted spectral index and running when the primordial spectrum contains oscillations. A reader would care because the effect generates a difference n_s^{TT} minus n_s^{EE} that is absent without the smoothing and that future CMB experiments could detect, potentially flagging exotic features in the early-universe spectrum.

Core claim

The central claim is that the finite duration of recombination introduces a Gaussian smoothing scale in ln k with width sigma_ln k approximately equal to sigma_eta over D_*, converting the deterministic ell-to-k mapping into a probabilistic one. The observed effective power spectrum is therefore the true primordial spectrum blurred by uncertainty in scale reconstruction. This blurring is mathematically identical to Bayesian marginalization over a latent variable and produces a non-trivial difference between the TT and EE inferred spectral indices that standard inflation without smoothing lacks; the difference may become observable with future CMB data and any such tension could indicate the

What carries the argument

Gaussian smoothing scale in ln k with width sigma_ln k ~ sigma_eta / D_*, which turns the deterministic multipole-to-wavenumber mapping into a probabilistic one and blurs the primordial power spectrum.

If this is right

  • The smoothing effect is zero for standard power-law inflation but becomes relevant for models with oscillating features in the primordial spectrum.
  • The difference n_s^{TT} minus n_s^{EE} is non-trivial and could be detected by next-generation CMB experiments.
  • Any observed tension between TT and EE spectral indices may indicate oscillations in the primordial spectrum together with the smoothing effect.
  • A Fisher-matrix forecast indicates that the smoothing is potentially observable with planned experiments.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Parameter-estimation pipelines could treat the wavenumber as a random variable drawn from the recombination uncertainty to propagate the error directly.
  • Analogous smoothing from finite-duration effects might appear in other scale-sensitive observables such as baryon acoustic oscillations.
  • The TT-EE difference offers a new diagnostic that could help separate featureless from featured inflationary models in combined datasets.

Load-bearing premise

The finite duration of recombination can be modeled as a Gaussian smoothing in ln k whose width is set by the recombination duration divided by the distance to last scattering.

What would settle it

A measurement in future high-precision CMB data showing a TT minus EE spectral-index difference whose magnitude matches the predicted smoothing width, or the absence of any such difference at the level required by the model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19336 by V.K. Oikonomou.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: The fraction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The signal-to-noise ratio for the smoothing eigenmode, for various CMB experiments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Standard CMB analysis assumes a direct deterministic mapping between the multipole probed by the CMB $\ell$ and the primordial wavenumber $k$. Since the recombination era has a finite duration, this mapping is probabilistic by construction. We elevate the power spectrum of the primordial perturbations to a probability distribution caused by the finite duration of the recombination era. We show that a finite recombination width introduces a Gaussian smoothing scale in $\ln k$ with $\sigma_{\ln k} \sim \sigma_\eta / D_*$, leading to a probabilistic mapping from multipoles to inflationary e-folds. This effect is zero in standard power-law inflationary scenarios, but it may become relevant for scenarios with exotic oscillating features of the primordial power spectrum, which will be probed by the future CMB experiments. The observed effective power spectrum is the true primordial spectrum blurred by the uncertainty in scale reconstruction, which is mathematically identical to a Bayesian marginalization over a latent variable, and thus there is a propagation of the measurement error in the independent variable, which is another more formal way to view the smoothing effect. Our results indicate that the smoothing has quantifiable effects on the spectral index and its running, but more importantly the difference between the TT and EE inferred spectral indices, $n_s^{TT}-n_s^{EE}$, is non-trivial, in contrast to standard inflation without smoothing, and might become observable by future cosmic microwave background experiments. Any tension in $n_s^{TT}-n_s^{EE}$ could indicate oscillations in the primordial spectrum and the effects of the power spectrum smoothing. Finally, a minimal Fisher matrix analysis is performed to investigate the observability prospects of the smoothing effect.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that the finite duration of recombination introduces a probabilistic mapping from CMB multipoles ℓ to primordial wavenumbers k, modeled as Gaussian smoothing of the primordial power spectrum in ln k with width σ_ln k ∼ σ_η / D_*. This blurring is equivalent to marginalizing over a latent scale variable and is said to produce quantifiable shifts in the spectral index n_s and its running. The central result is that this yields a non-trivial difference n_s^{TT} − n_s^{EE} (absent in standard unsmoothed analyses), which could become observable with future CMB data and serve as a signature of oscillating features in the inflationary spectrum. A Fisher-matrix forecast is presented to assess detectability.

Significance. If the quantitative results hold, the work identifies a previously overlooked systematic arising from recombination physics that could bias or differentiate inflationary parameter extraction from temperature versus polarization spectra. It offers a formal Bayesian view of scale uncertainty and a potential new diagnostic for primordial features. The approach is conceptually interesting, but its significance for the field depends on whether the claimed TT–EE difference survives explicit calculation with realistic transfer functions.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The statements that the smoothing effect 'is zero in standard power-law inflationary scenarios' yet produces a 'non-trivial' n_s^{TT}−n_s^{EE} difference (in contrast to the unsmoothed case) are internally inconsistent. For P(k) ∝ k^{n_s−1}, the convolution with a Gaussian of constant width σ in ln k yields only the k-independent factor exp[(n_s−1)^2 σ^2/2]. When this rescaled spectrum is folded through any transfer functions Δ_ℓ^T(k) or Δ_ℓ^E(k), the ℓ-dependence of C_ℓ remains unchanged up to an overall amplitude, so a power-law fit recovers identical n_s from TT and EE. This directly undermines the central claim that the difference is observable and diagnostic of oscillations.
  2. [Modeling section] The modeling section (presumably §2–3 where the probabilistic mapping and σ_ln k ∼ σ_η / D_* are introduced): The translation from finite recombination duration to a Gaussian smoothing applied to P(k) must be derived explicitly, including why this produces different effective n_s for TT versus EE. Because D_* is common and the rescaling is k-independent for power laws, it is not obvious how the effect differentiates the two spectra without additional TT/EE-specific assumptions on σ_η or the transfer-function weighting.
  3. [Fisher matrix analysis] Fisher-matrix section: The forecast must specify the fiducial cosmology (power-law only, or with oscillations), the exact parameterization of the smoothing width, and whether the standard Boltzmann transfer functions already incorporate recombination thickness. Without these details the claimed observability prospects cannot be evaluated.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The phrase 'quantifiable effects on the spectral index and its running' should be accompanied by at least an order-of-magnitude estimate or sign of the shift to give the reader immediate context.
  2. [Throughout] Notation: Define D_* and σ_η at first appearance and ensure consistent use of σ_ln k versus σ_η throughout.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and valuable comments, which help clarify and strengthen our presentation. We address each major comment point by point below. Where the referee's observations are correct, we agree to revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The statements that the smoothing effect 'is zero in standard power-law inflationary scenarios' yet produces a 'non-trivial' n_s^{TT}−n_s^{EE} difference (in contrast to the unsmoothed case) are internally inconsistent. For P(k) ∝ k^{n_s−1}, the convolution with a Gaussian of constant width σ in ln k yields only the k-independent factor exp[(n_s−1)^2 σ^2/2]. When this rescaled spectrum is folded through any transfer functions Δ_ℓ^T(k) or Δ_ℓ^E(k), the ℓ-dependence of C_ℓ remains unchanged up to an overall amplitude, so a power-law fit recovers identical n_s from TT and EE. This directly undermines the central claim that the difference is observable and diagnostic of oscillations.

    Authors: The referee is correct that, for an exact power-law spectrum P(k) ∝ k^{n_s−1}, Gaussian smoothing in ln k produces only a k-independent multiplicative factor, so the shape is preserved and a power-law fit yields the same n_s for both TT and EE. We will revise the abstract to remove any ambiguity and explicitly state that the smoothing effect on the spectral index is zero for pure power-law inflation, while the non-trivial n_s^{TT}−n_s^{EE} difference emerges for spectra containing features or running, where the distinct k-weightings of the TT and EE transfer functions cause the marginalization over the latent scale to affect the effective tilt differently. This clarification aligns with our discussion of oscillating features and preserves the diagnostic potential without overstating the power-law case. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Modeling section] The modeling section (presumably §2–3 where the probabilistic mapping and σ_ln k ∼ σ_η / D_* are introduced): The translation from finite recombination duration to a Gaussian smoothing applied to P(k) must be derived explicitly, including why this produces different effective n_s for TT versus EE. Because D_* is common and the rescaling is k-independent for power laws, it is not obvious how the effect differentiates the two spectra without additional TT/EE-specific assumptions on σ_η or the transfer-function weighting.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation is required. In the revised modeling section we will derive the Gaussian smoothing from first principles: the finite recombination duration σ_η implies a probabilistic last-scattering surface, so the mapping from observed multipole ℓ to wavenumber k is a Gaussian in ln k with width σ_ln k ≈ σ_η / D_*. Although D_* is shared, the TT and EE transfer functions Δ_ℓ^T(k) and Δ_ℓ^E(k) possess different k-dependencies and acoustic-peak structures. When the primordial spectrum is marginalized over the latent scale variable, this produces distinct effective modifications to the inferred tilt for each spectrum. We will add the full derivation, a short analytic illustration for a power-law-plus-running case, and a brief discussion of the transfer-function weighting to make the differentiation transparent. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Fisher matrix analysis] Fisher-matrix section: The forecast must specify the fiducial cosmology (power-law only, or with oscillations), the exact parameterization of the smoothing width, and whether the standard Boltzmann transfer functions already incorporate recombination thickness. Without these details the claimed observability prospects cannot be evaluated.

    Authors: We will expand the Fisher-matrix section with the requested specifications. The fiducial model will be a power-law spectrum with n_s = 0.9649 and no running or oscillations; a second case with a sinusoidal feature will be added for comparison. The smoothing width is parameterized exactly as σ_ln k = σ_η / D_*, using the recombination duration σ_η from Planck 2018 constraints. Standard Boltzmann codes already include finite recombination thickness in the transfer functions Δ_ℓ(k); our additional smoothing represents an extra marginalization over scale uncertainty in the primordial spectrum itself and is therefore supplementary. We will insert a clarifying paragraph and update the forecast tables accordingly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; smoothing width derived from recombination parameters rather than fitted to observables

full rationale

The paper introduces a Gaussian smoothing scale σ_ln k ∼ σ_η / D_* directly from the finite duration of recombination, treating the effective power spectrum as the primordial spectrum convolved with this kernel (equivalent to marginalization over a latent scale variable). This construction is independent of the target n_s^{TT}-n_s^{EE} difference; the width is not adjusted to reproduce any spectral-index split. The abstract explicitly states the effect vanishes for power-law spectra, and the claimed non-trivial difference for TT versus EE is presented as a derived consequence of folding the smoothed spectrum through distinct transfer functions, without any self-referential fitting or redefinition that would make the output identical to the input by construction. No self-citation chains or ansatzes imported from prior work by the same author are invoked to justify the central mapping.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on treating the recombination duration as a source of probabilistic scale uncertainty; no new particles or forces are introduced, but the quantitative mapping depends on the physical width parameter σ_η.

free parameters (1)
  • recombination duration width σ_η
    Determines the smoothing scale via σ_ln k ∼ σ_η / D_*; its value is taken from standard recombination physics but enters the final observables directly.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard CMB analysis assumes a direct deterministic mapping between multipole ℓ and primordial wavenumber k
    The paper explicitly contrasts its probabilistic treatment with this standard assumption.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5824 in / 1413 out tokens · 60888 ms · 2026-05-20T04:41:25.287987+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

55 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages · 39 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Recombination Thickness as an Uncertainty in Inflationary Observables

    Center for Theoretical Physics, Khazar University, 41 Mehseti Str., Baku, AZ-1096, Azerbaijan Standard CMB analysis assumes a direct deterministic mapping between the multipole probed by the CMBℓand the primordial wavenumberk. Since the recombination era has a finite duration, this mapping is probabilistic by construction. We elevate the power spectrum of...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    A. D. Linde, Lect. Notes Phys.738(2008) 1 [arXiv:0705.0164 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  3. [3]

    Introduction to the theory of the early universe: Cosmological perturbations and inflationary theory,

    D. S. Gorbunov and V. A. Rubakov, “Introduction to the theory of the early universe: Cosmological perturbations and inflationary theory,” Hackensack, USA: World Scientific (2011) 489 p

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    Inflationary Cosmology after Planck 2013

    A. Linde, arXiv:1402.0526 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  5. [5]

    D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto, Phys. Rept.314(1999) 1 [hep-ph/9807278]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  6. [6]

    M. H. Abitbolet al.[Simons Observatory], Bull. Am. Astron. Soc.51(2019), 147 [arXiv:1907.08284 [astro-ph.IM]]

    work page arXiv 2019

  7. [7]

    Allyset al.[LiteBIRD], PTEP2023(2023) no.4, 042F01 doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac150 [arXiv:2202.02773 [astro-ph.IM]]

    E. Allyset al.[LiteBIRD], PTEP2023(2023) no.4, 042F01 doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac150 [arXiv:2202.02773 [astro-ph.IM]]

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac150 2023

  8. [8]

    S. Hild, M. Abernathy, F. Acernese, P. Amaro-Seoane, N. Andersson, K. Arun, F. Barone, B. Barr, M. Barsuglia and M. Beker,et al.Class. Quant. Grav.28(2011), 094013 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/28/9/094013 [arXiv:1012.0908 [gr-qc]]. 19

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0264-9381/28/9/094013 2011

  9. [9]

    The Laser Interferometer Space Antenna: Unveiling the Millihertz Gravitational Wave Sky

    J. Baker, J. Bellovary, P. L. Bender, E. Berti, R. Caldwell, J. Camp, J. W. Conklin, N. Cornish, C. Cutler and R. DeRosa, et al.[arXiv:1907.06482 [astro-ph.IM]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1907

  10. [10]

    T. L. Smith and R. Caldwell, Phys. Rev. D100(2019) no.10, 104055 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.104055 [arXiv:1908.00546 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.104055 2019

  11. [11]

    Beyond LISA: Exploring Future Gravitational Wave Missions

    J. Crowder and N. J. Cornish, Phys. Rev. D72(2005), 083005 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.083005 [arXiv:gr-qc/0506015 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.72.083005 2005

  12. [12]

    T. L. Smith and R. Caldwell, Phys. Rev. D95(2017) no.4, 044036 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.044036 [arXiv:1609.05901 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.95.044036 2017

  13. [13]

    N. Seto, S. Kawamura and T. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. Lett.87(2001), 221103 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.221103 [arXiv:astro-ph/0108011 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.87.221103 2001

  14. [14]

    Current status of space gravitational wave antenna DECIGO and B-DECIGO

    S. Kawamura, M. Ando, N. Seto, S. Sato, M. Musha, I. Kawano, J. Yokoyama, T. Tanaka, K. Ioka and T. Akutsu,et al. [arXiv:2006.13545 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  15. [15]

    Weltman, P

    A. Weltman, P. Bull, S. Camera, K. Kelley, H. Padmanabhan, J. Pritchard, A. Raccanelli, S. Riemer-Sørensen, L. Shao and S. Andrianomena,et al.Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral.37(2020), e002 doi:10.1017/pasa.2019.42 [arXiv:1810.02680 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2019.42 2020

  16. [16]

    Auclairet al.[LISA Cosmology Working Group], [arXiv:2204.05434 [astro-ph.CO]]

    P. Auclairet al.[LISA Cosmology Working Group], [arXiv:2204.05434 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  17. [17]

    The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-Wave Background

    G. Agazieet al.[NANOGrav], Astrophys. J. Lett.951(2023) no.1, L8 doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acdac6 [arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acdac6 2023

  18. [18]

    Vagnozzi, JHEAp39(2023), 81-98 doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2023.07.001 [arXiv:2306.16912 [astro-ph.CO]]

    S. Vagnozzi, JHEAp39(2023), 81-98 doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2023.07.001 [arXiv:2306.16912 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2023.07.001 2023

  19. [19]

    V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.4, 043516 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.043516 [arXiv:2306.17351 [astro- ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.043516 2023

  20. [20]

    C. Zeng, E. D. Kovetz, X. Chen, Y. Gong, J. B. Mu˜ noz and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. D99(2019) no.4, 043517 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.043517 [arXiv:1812.05105 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.99.043517 2019

  21. [21]

    Dom` enech and M

    G. Dom` enech and M. Kamionkowski, JCAP11(2019), 040 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/11/040 [arXiv:1905.04323 [astro- ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/11/040 2019

  22. [22]

    U. H. Danielsson, Phys. Rev. D66(2002), 023511 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.66.023511 [arXiv:hep-th/0203198 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.66.023511 2002

  23. [23]

    M. G. Jackson and G. Shiu, Phys. Rev. D88(2013) no.12, 123511 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.123511 [arXiv:1303.4973 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.88.123511 2013

  24. [24]

    Mode Generating Mechanism in Inflation with Cutoff

    A. Kempf, Phys. Rev. D63(2001), 083514 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.63.083514 [arXiv:astro-ph/0009209 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.63.083514 2001

  25. [25]

    Imprints of Short Distance Physics On Inflationary Cosmology

    R. Easther, B. R. Greene, W. H. Kinney and G. Shiu, Phys. Rev. D67(2003), 063508 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.67.063508 [arXiv:hep-th/0110226 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.67.063508 2003

  26. [26]

    On the Dependence of the Spectra of Fluctuations in Inflationary Cosmology on Trans-Planckian Physics

    J. Martin and R. Brandenberger, Phys. Rev. D68(2003), 063513 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.063513 [arXiv:hep-th/0305161 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.68.063513 2003

  27. [27]

    X. Chen, R. Easther and E. A. Lim, JCAP04(2008), 010 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2008/04/010 [arXiv:0801.3295 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2008/04/010 2008

  28. [28]

    Oscillations in the CMB from Axion Monodromy Inflation

    R. Flauger, L. McAllister, E. Pajer, A. Westphal and G. Xu, JCAP06(2010), 009 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2010/06/009 [arXiv:0907.2916 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2010/06/009 2010

  29. [29]

    L. Covi, J. Hamann, A. Melchiorri, A. Slosar and I. Sorbera, Phys. Rev. D74(2006), 083509 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.083509 [arXiv:astro-ph/0606452 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.083509 2006

  30. [30]

    New Constraints on Oscillations in the Primordial Spectrum of Inflationary Perturbations

    J. Hamann, L. Covi, A. Melchiorri and A. Slosar, Phys. Rev. D76(2007), 023503 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.023503 [arXiv:astro-ph/0701380 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.76.023503 2007

  31. [31]

    D. K. Hazra, M. Aich, R. K. Jain, L. Sriramkumar and T. Souradeep, JCAP10(2010), 008 doi:10.1088/1475- 7516/2010/10/008 [arXiv:1005.2175 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475- 2010

  32. [32]

    Primordial power spectrum from WMAP

    A. Shafieloo and T. Souradeep, Phys. Rev. D70(2004), 043523 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.043523 [arXiv:astro-ph/0312174 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.70.043523 2004

  33. [33]

    Localized correlated features in the CMB power spectrum and primordial bispectrum from a transient reduction in the speed of sound

    A. Ach´ ucarro, V. Atal, P. Ortiz and J. Torrado, Phys. Rev. D89(2014) no.10, 103006 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.103006 [arXiv:1311.2552 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.89.103006 2014

  34. [34]

    D. K. Hazra, A. Shafieloo and T. Souradeep, JCAP11(2014), 011 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2014/11/011 [arXiv:1406.4827 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2014/11/011 2014

  35. [35]

    X. Chen, M. H. Namjoo and Y. Wang, JCAP02(2015), 027 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2015/02/027 [arXiv:1411.2349 [astro- ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2015/02/027 2015

  36. [36]

    Reconstruction of the Primordial Power Spectrum using Temperature and Polarisation Data from Multiple Experiments

    G. Nicholson and C. R. Contaldi, JCAP07(2009), 011 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2009/07/011 [arXiv:0903.1106 [astro- ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2009/07/011 2009

  37. [37]

    Search for features in the spectrum of primordial perturbations using Planck and other datasets

    P. Hunt and S. Sarkar, JCAP12(2015), 052 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2015/12/052 [arXiv:1510.03338 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2015/12/052 2015

  38. [38]

    Braglia, X

    M. Braglia, X. Chen and D. K. Hazra, JCAP06(2021), 005 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/06/005 [arXiv:2103.03025 [astro- ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/06/005 2021

  39. [39]

    Braglia, X

    M. Braglia, X. Chen and D. K. Hazra, Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) no.5, 498 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10461-3 [arXiv:2106.07546 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10461-3 2022

  40. [40]

    Antony and S

    A. Antony and S. Jain, Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) no.8, 687 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10616-2 [arXiv:2110.06837 [astro- ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10616-2 2022

  41. [41]

    D. K. Hazra, A. Antony and A. Shafieloo, JCAP08(2022) no.08, 063 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2022/08/063 [arXiv:2201.12000 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2022/08/063 2022

  42. [42]

    Antony, F

    A. Antony, F. Finelli, D. K. Hazra and A. Shafieloo, Phys. Rev. Lett.130(2023) no.11, 111001 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.111001 [arXiv:2202.14028 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.130.111001 2023

  43. [43]

    Monodromy in the CMB: Gravity Waves and String Inflation

    E. Silverstein and A. Westphal, Phys. Rev. D78(2008), 106003 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.106003 [arXiv:0803.3085 [hep- 20 th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.78.106003 2008

  44. [44]

    Gravity Waves and Linear Inflation from Axion Monodromy

    L. McAllister, E. Silverstein and A. Westphal, Phys. Rev. D82(2010), 046003 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.046003 [arXiv:0808.0706 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.82.046003 2010

  45. [45]

    S. R. Behbahani, A. Dymarsky, M. Mirbabayi and L. Senatore, JCAP12(2012), 036 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2012/12/036 [arXiv:1111.3373 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2012/12/036 2012

  46. [46]

    X. Wang, B. Feng, M. Li, X. L. Chen and X. Zhang, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D14(2005), 1347 doi:10.1142/S0218271805006985 [arXiv:astro-ph/0209242 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1142/s0218271805006985 2005

  47. [47]

    A generic estimate of trans-Planckian modifications to the primordial power spectrum in inflation

    R. Easther, B. R. Greene, W. H. Kinney and G. Shiu, Phys. Rev. D66(2002), 023518 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.66.023518 [arXiv:hep-th/0204129 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.66.023518 2002

  48. [48]

    Bozza, M

    V. Bozza, M. Giovannini and G. Veneziano, JCAP05(2003), 001 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2003/05/001 [arXiv:hep- th/0302184 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2003/05/001 2003

  49. [49]

    CMB Constraints on Principal Components of the Inflaton Potential

    C. Dvorkin and W. Hu, Phys. Rev. D82(2010), 043513 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.043513 [arXiv:1007.0215 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.82.043513 2010

  50. [50]

    Generalized Slow Roll for Large Power Spectrum Features

    C. Dvorkin and W. Hu, Phys. Rev. D81(2010), 023518 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.023518 [arXiv:0910.2237 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.81.023518 2010

  51. [51]

    M. J. Mortonson, H. V. Peiris and R. Easther, Phys. Rev. D83(2011), 043505 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.043505 [arXiv:1007.4205 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.83.043505 2011

  52. [52]

    Fast Computation of Bispectrum Features with Generalized Slow Roll

    P. Adshead, W. Hu, C. Dvorkin and H. V. Peiris, Phys. Rev. D84(2011), 043519 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.043519 [arXiv:1102.3435 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.84.043519 2011

  53. [53]

    J. A. Adams, B. Cresswell and R. Easther, Phys. Rev. D64(2001), 123514 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.123514 [arXiv:astro- ph/0102236 [astro-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.64.123514 2001

  54. [54]

    Dark Synergy: Gravitational Lensing and the CMB

    W. Hu, Phys. Rev. D65(2002), 023003 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.023003 [arXiv:astro-ph/0108090 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.65.023003 2002

  55. [55]

    Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation

    Y. Akramiet al.[Planck], Astron. Astrophys.641(2020), A10 doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833887 [arXiv:1807.06211 [astro- ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833887 2020