pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.27727 · v1 · pith:EXWM5TW6new · submitted 2026-05-26 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.CO

Reconstructing ACT-compatible and GW170817-compatible Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet Inflation from the Observational Indices

V.K. Oikonomou This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 15:12 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.CO
keywords Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet inflationinverse reconstructiontensor-to-scalar ratioACT observationsGW170817scalar perturbationsslow-roll inflation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Inverse reconstruction from the tensor-to-scalar ratio yields four Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet inflation models compatible with ACT and GW170817 data.

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

The paper shows how to start from a chosen tensor-to-scalar ratio and use inverse reconstruction to determine the scalar Gauss-Bonnet coupling function together with the scalar potential. These choices produce slow-roll inflation that reproduces the input ratio while also satisfying the observed scalar perturbation amplitude, a matching that does not follow automatically in Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet theories. Four explicit models are constructed and verified against the full set of current observational constraints. A sympathetic reader would care because the method supplies concrete, workable examples of modified-gravity inflation without additional free parameters beyond the initial ratio.

Core claim

Starting from a given tensor-to-scalar ratio, the inverse reconstruction technique determines the scalar Gauss-Bonnet coupling function and the scalar potential that together produce the desired ratio, consistent slow-roll evolution, and the observed scalar perturbation amplitude. Four such models are explicitly constructed and shown to remain compatible with ACT and GW170817 constraints after all tests, including the non-trivial amplitude check.

What carries the argument

Inverse reconstruction technique that derives the Gauss-Bonnet coupling function and scalar potential directly from a specified tensor-to-scalar ratio.

If this is right

  • The four models exhibit consistent slow-roll dynamics.
  • The scalar perturbation amplitude matches observations without further parameter adjustment.
  • Compatibility with ACT and GW170817 constraints holds after the full suite of tests.
  • Multiple distinct viable inflation scenarios can be generated from the same reconstruction procedure.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same reconstruction procedure could be applied to other modified-gravity actions to generate observationally viable models.
  • Future tighter bounds on the tensor-to-scalar ratio would directly limit the allowed forms of the coupling function.
  • The generated models could be checked against additional observables such as the running of the spectral index or non-Gaussianity parameters.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that a coupling function and potential derived solely from the tensor-to-scalar ratio will automatically produce consistent slow-roll dynamics and the correct scalar amplitude without extra tuning.

What would settle it

An explicit computation for any of the four reconstructed models in which the scalar power spectrum amplitude deviates from the observed value.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.27727 by V.K. Oikonomou.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Planck 2018 Likelihood Curves and ACT data for the Model I with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Planck 2018 Likelihood Curves and ACT data for the Model II with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Planck 2018 Likelihood Curves and ACT data for the Model III with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Planck 2018 Likelihood Curves and ACT data for the Model IV with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this work we use an inverse reconstruction technique for constructing ACT-compatible and GW170817-compatible Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet inflationary theories. From a given tensor-to-scalar ratio using the reconstruction technique, we find which scalar Gauss-Bonnet coupling function and which scalar potential can yield the given tensor-to-scalar ratio. We present the formalism and the viable theories pass a series of observational tests, including the amplitude of the scalar perturbations, which is non-trivial for Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet theories. We present four viable models of inflation that pass all the observational tests.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops an inverse reconstruction technique for Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet (EGB) inflation. Given a target tensor-to-scalar ratio r compatible with ACT and GW170817, the authors derive the Gauss-Bonnet coupling function ξ(φ) and potential V(φ) that reproduce this r, then verify that the resulting models also satisfy the scalar perturbation amplitude and other slow-roll indices. Four explicit viable models are presented that pass the full set of observational tests.

Significance. If the amplitude constraint is shown to be satisfied independently of the input r choice, the method supplies a systematic route to construct observationally viable EGB models without ad-hoc parameter tuning. Concrete examples of such models would be useful for exploring modified-gravity inflation scenarios consistent with current data.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and §2] Abstract and §2 (reconstruction formalism): the central claim that the scalar amplitude match is 'non-trivial' requires explicit demonstration that the amplitude expression, once the functions are reconstructed from r, is not automatically satisfied by construction. The manuscript should derive the amplitude in terms of the reconstructed ξ(φ) and V(φ) and show the independent constraint it imposes.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that four models pass all tests but does not list the explicit functional forms or the numerical values of the slow-roll indices; these should be tabulated for reproducibility.
  2. [§3] Notation for the reconstructed functions should be introduced once and used consistently; the transition between the general reconstruction equations and the specific models is abrupt.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and the constructive suggestion regarding the non-triviality claim for the scalar amplitude. We address the major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §2] Abstract and §2 (reconstruction formalism): the central claim that the scalar amplitude match is 'non-trivial' requires explicit demonstration that the amplitude expression, once the functions are reconstructed from r, is not automatically satisfied by construction. The manuscript should derive the amplitude in terms of the reconstructed ξ(φ) and V(φ) and show the independent constraint it imposes.

    Authors: We agree that the claim of non-triviality for the scalar amplitude in EGB theories requires explicit support. In the revised version we will add, in §2, the full derivation of the scalar power spectrum amplitude A_s expressed directly in terms of the reconstructed ξ(φ) and V(φ) obtained from the chosen r. We will then demonstrate that A_s is not fixed by the reconstruction procedure alone and that an additional independent constraint arises, which is satisfied only for specific functional forms or parameter choices. This will be illustrated with the four explicit models already presented, confirming that the amplitude constraint is imposed separately from the input r. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; reconstruction from r followed by independent amplitude verification

full rationale

The paper describes an inverse reconstruction that takes an observed tensor-to-scalar ratio r as input and solves for the Gauss-Bonnet coupling ξ(φ) and potential V(φ) that reproduce it. The abstract explicitly states that the subsequent verification of the scalar perturbation amplitude is non-trivial for Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet theories, indicating that this check is not automatically satisfied by the choice of r and therefore constitutes an independent constraint. No self-citation is invoked as a load-bearing uniqueness theorem, no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no ansatz is smuggled via prior work. The derivation chain therefore remains self-contained against external observational benchmarks rather than reducing to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be extracted. Standard slow-roll assumptions and the validity of the reconstruction technique itself are implicit but unstated in the provided text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5623 in / 1162 out tokens · 29338 ms · 2026-06-29T15:12:09.174173+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

114 extracted references · 110 canonical work pages · 50 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Reconstructing ACT-compatible and GW170817-compatible Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet Inflation from the Observational Indices

    Center for Theoretical Physics, Khazar University, 41 Mehseti Str., Baku, AZ-1096, Azerbaijan In this work we use an inverse reconstruction technique for constructing ACT-compatible and GW170817-compatible Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet inflationary theories. From a given tensor-to-scalar ratio using the reconstruction technique, we find which scalar Gauss-Bonnet ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  2. [2]

    B. P. Abbottet al.[LIGO Scientific and Virgo], Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017) no.16, 161101 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101 [arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.161101 2017

  3. [3]

    B. P. Abbottet al.[LIGO Scientific, Virgo, Fermi-GBM and INTEGRAL], Astrophys. J. Lett.848(2017) no.2, L13 doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa920c [arXiv:1710.05834 [astro-ph.HE]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa920c 2017

  4. [4]

    Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger

    B. P. Abbottet al.“Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger,” Astrophys. J.848(2017) no.2, L12 doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9 [arXiv:1710.05833 [astro-ph.HE]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9 2017

  5. [5]

    J. M. Ezquiaga and M. Zumalac´ arregui, Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017) no.25, 251304 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.251304 [arXiv:1710.05901 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.251304 2017

  6. [6]

    Strong constraints on cosmological gravity from GW170817 and GRB 170817A

    T. Baker, E. Bellini, P. G. Ferreira, M. Lagos, J. Noller and I. Sawicki, Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017) no.25, 251301 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.251301 [arXiv:1710.06394 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.251301 2017

  7. [7]

    Dark Energy after GW170817 and GRB170817A

    P. Creminelli and F. Vernizzi, Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017) no.25, 251302 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.251302 [arXiv:1710.05877 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.251302 2017

  8. [8]

    Implications of the Neutron Star Merger GW170817 for Cosmological Scalar-Tensor Theories

    J. Sakstein and B. Jain, Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017) no.25, 251303 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.251303 [arXiv:1710.05893 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.251303 2017

  9. [9]

    P. G. S. Fernandes, P. Carrilho, T. Clifton and D. J. Mulryne, Class. Quant. Grav.39(2022) no.6, 063001 doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ac500a [arXiv:2202.13908 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ac500a 2022

  10. [10]

    J. c. Hwang and H. Noh, Phys. Rev. D71(2005) 063536 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.063536 [gr-qc/0412126]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.71.063536 2005

  11. [11]

    Dark energy cosmology from higher-order, string-inspired gravity and its reconstruction

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov and M. Sami, Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 046004 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.046004 [hep-th/0605039]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.046004 2006

  12. [12]

    String-inspired Gauss-Bonnet gravity reconstructed from the universe expansion history and yielding the transition from matter dominance to dark energy

    G. Cognola, E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri, S. Odintsov and S. Zerbini, Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 086002 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.086002 [hep-th/0611198]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.75.086002 2007

  13. [13]

    Nojiri, S

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov and M. Sasaki, Phys. Rev. D71(2005) 123509 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.123509 [hep- th/0504052]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.71.123509 2005

  14. [14]

    Modified Gauss-Bonnet theory as gravitational alternative for dark energy

    S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Lett. B631(2005) 1 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.10.010 [hep-th/0508049]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.10.010 2005

  15. [15]

    Circular Polarization of Primordial Gravitational Waves in String-inspired Inflationary Cosmology

    M. Satoh, S. Kanno and J. Soda, Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 023526 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.023526 [arXiv:0706.3585 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.77.023526 2008

  16. [16]

    Bounce universe from string-inspired Gauss-Bonnet gravity

    K. Bamba, A. N. Makarenko, A. N. Myagky and S. D. Odintsov, JCAP1504(2015) 001 doi:10.1088/1475- 7516/2015/04/001 [arXiv:1411.3852 [hep-th]]

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

  17. [17]

    Z. Yi, Y. Gong and M. Sabir, Phys. Rev. D98(2018) no.8, 083521 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.083521 [arXiv:1804.09116 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.083521 2018

  18. [18]

    Z. K. Guo and D. J. Schwarz, Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 063523 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.063523 [arXiv:0907.0427 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.80.063523 2009

  19. [19]

    Z. K. Guo and D. J. Schwarz, Phys. Rev. D81(2010) 123520 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.123520 [arXiv:1001.1897 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.81.123520 2010

  20. [20]

    P. X. Jiang, J. W. Hu and Z. K. Guo, Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 123508 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.123508 [arXiv:1310.5579 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.88.123508 2013

  21. [21]

    Gauss-Bonnet-coupled Quintessential Inflation

    C. van de Bruck, K. Dimopoulos, C. Longden and C. Owen, arXiv:1707.06839 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  22. [22]

    E. O. Pozdeeva, M. R. Gangopadhyay, M. Sami, A. V. Toporensky and S. Y. Vernov, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) no.4, 043525 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.043525 [arXiv:2006.08027 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.043525 2020

  23. [23]

    Vernov and E

    S. Vernov and E. Pozdeeva, Universe7(2021) no.5, 149 doi:10.3390/universe7050149 [arXiv:2104.11111 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.3390/universe7050149 2021

  24. [24]

    E. O. Pozdeeva and S. Y. Vernov, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) no.7, 633 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09435-8 [arXiv:2104.04995 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09435-8 2021

  25. [25]

    Fomin, Eur

    I. Fomin, Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) no.12, 1145 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08718-w [arXiv:2004.08065 [gr-qc]]. 10

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08718-w 2020

  26. [26]

    Cosmological inflation in $F(R,\mathcal{G})$ gravity

    M. De Laurentis, M. Paolella and S. Capozziello, Phys. Rev. D91(2015) no.8, 083531 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.083531 [arXiv:1503.04659 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.91.083531 2015

  27. [27]

    Chervon, I

    Scalar Field Cosmology, S. Chervon, I. Fomin, V. Yurov and A. Yurov, World Scientific 2019, doi:10.1142/11405

    work page doi:10.1142/11405 2019

  28. [28]

    Perturbation, Non-Gaussianity and Reheating in a GB-$\alpha$-Attractor Model

    K. Nozari and N. Rashidi, Phys. Rev. D95(2017) no.12, 123518 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.123518 [arXiv:1705.02617 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.95.123518 2017

  29. [29]

    S. D. Odintsov and V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Rev. D98(2018) no.4, 044039 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.044039 [arXiv:1808.05045 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.044039 2018

  30. [30]

    Instability of 1-loop superstring cosmology

    S. Kawai, M. a. Sakagami and J. Soda, Phys. Lett. B437, 284 (1998) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00925-3 [gr-qc/9802033]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(98)00925-3 1998

  31. [31]

    Gauss-Bonnet inflation and swampland

    Z. Yi and Y. Gong, Universe5(2019) no.9, 200 doi:10.3390/universe5090200 [arXiv:1811.01625 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3390/universe5090200 2019

  32. [32]

    Reheating in Gauss-Bonnet-coupled inflation

    C. van de Bruck, K. Dimopoulos and C. Longden, Phys. Rev. D94(2016) no.2, 023506 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.023506 [arXiv:1605.06350 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.94.023506 2016

  33. [33]

    K. i. Maeda, N. Ohta and R. Wakebe, Eur. Phys. J. C72(2012) 1949 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1949-6 [arXiv:1111.3251 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1949-6 2012

  34. [34]

    W. Y. Ai, Commun. Theor. Phys.72(2020) no.9, 095402 doi:10.1088/1572-9494/aba242 [arXiv:2004.02858 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1572-9494/aba242 2020

  35. [35]

    One-Loop Superstring Cosmology and the Non-Singular Universe

    R. Easther and K. i. Maeda, Phys. Rev. D54(1996) 7252 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.54.7252 [hep-th/9605173]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.54.7252 1996

  36. [36]

    On the covariant formalism of the effective field theory of gravity and leading order corrections

    A. Codello and R. K. Jain, Class. Quant. Grav.33(2016) no.22, 225006 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/33/22/225006 [arXiv:1507.06308 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0264-9381/33/22/225006 2016

  37. [37]

    V. K. Oikonomou, Class. Quant. Grav.38(2021) no.19, 195025 doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ac2168 [arXiv:2108.10460 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ac2168 2021

  38. [38]

    V. K. Oikonomou, Astropart. Phys.141(2022), 102718 doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2022.102718 [arXiv:2204.06304 [gr- qc]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2022.102718 2022

  39. [39]

    S. D. Odintsov, V. K. Oikonomou and F. P. Fronimos, Nucl. Phys. B958(2020), 115135 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2020.115135 [arXiv:2003.13724 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2020.115135 2020

  40. [40]

    V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Lett. B856(2024), 138890 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138890 [arXiv:2407.12155 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138890 2024

  41. [41]

    J. Fier, H. Han, B. Li, K. Lin, S. Mukohyama and A. Wang, [arXiv:2503.01975 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv

  42. [42]

    V. K. Oikonomou, P. D. Katzanis and I. C. Papadimitriou, Class. Quant. Grav.39(2022) no.9, 095008 doi:10.1088/1361- 6382/ac5eba [arXiv:2203.09867 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1361- 2022

  43. [43]

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  44. [44]

    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

    2011

  45. [45]

    Inflationary Cosmology after Planck 2013

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  46. [46]

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  47. [47]

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

    work page arXiv 2019

  48. [48]

    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

  49. [49]

    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]]

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

  50. [50]

    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

  51. [51]

    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

  52. [52]

    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

  53. [53]

    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

  54. [54]

    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

  55. [55]

    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

  56. [56]

    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

  57. [57]

    Auclairet al.(LISA Cosmology Working Group), Living Rev

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

    work page arXiv

  58. [58]

    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

  59. [59]

    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

  60. [60]

    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

  61. [61]

    Modified Gravity Theories on a Nutshell: Inflation, Bounce and Late-time Evolution

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov and V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Rept.692(2017) 1 [arXiv:1705.11098 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  62. [62]

    Capozziello, M

    S. Capozziello, M. De Laurentis, Phys. Rept.509, 167 (2011); V. Faraoni and S. Capozziello, Fundam. Theor. Phys.170(2010)

    2011

  63. [63]

    Nojiri, S.D

    S. Nojiri, S.D. Odintsov, eConfC0602061, 06 (2006) [Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys.4, 115 (2007)]

    2006

  64. [64]

    Nojiri, S.D

    S. Nojiri, S.D. Odintsov, Phys. Rept.505, 59 (2011)

    2011

  65. [65]

    The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Power Spectra, Likelihoods and $\Lambda$CDM Parameters

    T. Louiset al.[ACT], [arXiv:2503.14452 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  66. [66]

    The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Constraints on Extended Cosmological Models

    E. Calabreseet al.[ACT], [arXiv:2503.14454 [astro-ph.CO]]. 11

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  67. [67]

    P. A. R. Adeet al.[BICEP and Keck], Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) no.15, 151301 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.151301 [arXiv:2110.00483 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.151301 2021

  68. [68]

    Kallosh, A

    R. Kallosh, A. Linde and D. Roest, [arXiv:2503.21030 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv

  69. [69]

    Q. Gao, Y. Gong, Z. Yi and F. Zhang, [arXiv:2504.15218 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  70. [70]

    L. Liu, Z. Yi and Y. Gong, [arXiv:2505.02407 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  71. [71]

    Mohammadi, Q

    Yogesh, A. Mohammadi, Q. Wu and T. Zhu, [arXiv:2505.05363 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  72. [72]

    Z. Yi, X. Wang, Q. Gao and Y. Gong, [arXiv:2505.10268 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  73. [73]

    Z. Z. Peng, Z. C. Chen and L. Liu, [arXiv:2505.12816 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  74. [74]

    Yin, [arXiv:2505.03004 [hep-ph]]

    W. Yin, [arXiv:2505.03004 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  75. [75]

    C. T. Byrnes, M. Cortˆ es and A. R. Liddle, [arXiv:2505.09682 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  76. [76]

    W. J. Wolf, [arXiv:2506.12436 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  77. [77]

    S. Aoki, H. Otsuka and R. Yanagita, [arXiv:2504.01622 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  78. [78]

    Q. Gao, Y. Qian, Y. Gong and Z. Yi, [arXiv:2506.18456 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv

  79. [79]

    Zahoor, S

    M. Zahoor, S. Khan and I. A. Bhat, [arXiv:2507.18684 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  80. [80]

    E. G. M. Ferreira, E. McDonough, L. Balkenhol, R. Kallosh, L. Knox and A. Linde, [arXiv:2507.12459 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

Showing first 80 references.