Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 68 references

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge.

T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. The mark states how deep the mechanical check went, never who wrote it. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · glm-5.2

Loop divergences in cosmic spectra absorbed without picking a model

2026-07-08 18:18 UTC pith:D36WX24J

load-bearing objection Background-independent one-loop renormalization of primordial tensor and scalar spectra via WKB UV extraction the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.06042 v1 pith:D36WX24J submitted 2026-07-07 hep-th astro-ph.COgr-qchep-ph

Background-independent one-loop renormalization of tensor and scalar primordial spectra

Guillermo Ballesteros , Jes\'us Gamb\'in Egea , Flavio Riccardi This is my paper
classification hep-th astro-ph.COgr-qchep-ph
keywords spectrabackground-independentfieldone-loopprimordialrenormalizationscalarspectrum
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper proves that the ultraviolet divergences appearing in one-loop corrections to primordial tensor and scalar power spectra can be isolated, identified, and absorbed by local counterterms without committing to any specific background cosmology or field potential. The mechanism is the universal high-momentum WKB expansion of the internal modes running in the loop. At large loop momentum, the mode functions take a universal asymptotic form whose coefficients depend only on the effective mass and its derivatives. This universal structure allows the UV divergent part of the loop integral to be extracted analytically before any time integrals are evaluated, and before any specific model is chosen. The divergences are then matched to counterterm insertions whose form is dictated either by covariant general relativity (for the tensor spectrum) or by tadpole renormalization (for the scalar spectrum). The result is a pair of finite, renormalized expressions for the one-loop tensor spectrum sourced by a spectator scalar and the one-loop scalar spectrum sourced by potential self-interactions, both valid on an arbitrary FLRW background.

Core claim

The central discovery is that the UV pole structure of cosmological one-loop diagrams is entirely determined by the universal WKB expansion of internal modes at high momentum, and this structure is sufficiently constrained that it can be matched to covariant counterterms model-independently. For the tensor spectrum, the divergences are absorbed by counterterms descending from four-derivative curvature invariants in the gravitational EFT, with no tensor mass counterterm needed, confirming consistency with general covariance on a time-dependent background. For the scalar spectrum, tadpole renormalization alone fixes all counterterms needed to cancel the UV divergences at leading order in the慢滚

What carries the argument

The WKB expansion of high-momentum modes, the IR/UV split at an arbitrary scale L, and the covariant gravitational EFT counterterm basis.

Load-bearing premise

The entire procedure relies on the internal loop modes admitting the WKB expansion at high momentum, which requires the effective mass to vary adiabatically. If the effective mass or its derivatives undergo abrupt transitions, this expansion fails.

What would settle it

If the WKB expansion of high-momentum modes does not correctly capture the UV behavior of the loop integrand, the extracted pole structure would be wrong and the counterterm matching would fail to produce a finite result.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents a background-independent renormalization framework for one-loop primordial spectra in FLRW backgrounds, applying it to two observables: (1) the scalar-induced tensor spectrum from a minimally coupled spectator field, and (2) the scalar power spectrum from potential self-interactions. The method uses dimensional regularization combined with the universal WKB expansion of internal loop modes to isolate UV divergences analytically, without specifying the background evolution or field potential. For the tensor case, the UV poles (Eq. 54) are matched to covariant gravitational EFT counterterms (Eq. 55), and the renormalized spectrum (Eq. 57) is shown to be finite with explicit L-independence. A de Sitter displaced-mass example (Section 3.3) yields a finite late-time limit with no log(-kτ) growth. For the scalar case, tadpole renormalization fixes the counterterm structure, and the UV divergences from the cubic and quartic diagrams cancel against the tadpole-induced counterterm (Eqs. 96-99), yielding a finite renormalized spectrum (Eq. 101). The paper also notes that IR divergences in the scalar spectrum are not fully treated.

Significance. The paper provides genuinely model-independent, closed-form renormalized one-loop spectra — a non-trivial achievement given that prior work required specifying the background. The matching of UV poles to covariant counterterms in the tensor sector (including the observation that no tensor mass counterterm is needed) is a meaningful consistency check. The de Sitter displaced-mass example provides a falsifiable, analytic prediction with non-trivial κ-dependence that cannot be absorbed by counterterms. The scalar-sector result, showing that tadpole renormalization suffices for UV finiteness within the potential-dominated approximation, clarifies the scheme-dependence of claims about loop cancellations on superhorizon scales. The framework is ready for direct numerical application.

major comments (3)
  1. Section 4.2.1, around Eqs. (96)-(99): The UV cancellation in the scalar sector depends on the next-to-leading term in the large-momentum expansion of the time derivative of the WKB frequency W_p (Eq. 96). The text states this cancellation 'originates from the next-to-leading term in the large-momentum expansion of the time derivative of the frequency W_p,' but does not specify at what order in the 1/k expansion the WKB series is truncated for this cancellation to hold. Since the cancellation involves differentiating W_p with respect to time (Eq. 8), and the subleading terms depend on m_eff^2 and its derivatives, the authors should state explicitly: (i) which terms in the WKB expansion (Eq. 8) are retained for the scalar-sector UV analysis, and (ii) whether the cancellation is exact at the order retained or whether there are residual UV-divergent pieces from higher-order WKB terms that, a
  2. Section 4.2.1, Eq. (100): The ε-suppressed UV-divergent remnants are stated to be 'expected' because the fluctuation action is incomplete at O(ε). However, the paper's central claim of model-independent renormalization is applied to ultra slow-roll models where ε ≪ 1 but higher slow-roll parameters are O(1). In such scenarios, the transition between slow-roll and ultra slow-roll phases can involve rapid (though smooth) time variation of m_eff^2. The adiabatic condition |d^n m_eff^2/dτ^n| ≪ k^{n+2} is acknowledged to fail for abrupt transitions (Section 4, near Eq. 83), but the paper does not assess whether the condition holds sufficiently well for the smooth transitions typical of ultra slow-roll models. A brief discussion of the convergence properties of the WKB series for smooth-but-rapid transitions, and whether the truncation order used is adequate, would strengthen the paper's claim
  3. Section 4.2.1, Eq. (101) and footnote 11: The renormalized scalar spectrum (Eq. 101) is presented as finite and ready for application, yet footnote 11 acknowledges that the scalar spectrum 'develops IR divergences when one of the internal loop momenta becomes soft' and that 'a fully satisfactory treatment of these IR divergences lies beyond the scope of the present work.' This is a significant caveat that is not reflected in the abstract or the conclusion. The authors should clarify in the main text (not just a footnote) what the practical implications are: can Eq. (101) be evaluated as-is for phenomenological applications, or does the IR divergence render it ill-defined without additional regularization? At minimum, the abstract and Section 5 should acknowledge this limitation.
minor comments (6)
  1. Eq. (57): The expression contains '...' in the term proportional to 21a^2( ... H + 3(3ḦH + 6ḢH^2 + Ḣ^2)). The ellipsis should be replaced with the explicit expression or clarified.
  2. Section 3.3, Eq. (65): The finite counterterm freedom is parametrized by α and m̃²_{f,χ}, but the relationship between these parameters and the C_{f,i} in Eq. (57) is only partially specified through Eq. (64). It would help the reader to state explicitly which C_{f,i} are absorbed into α and which remain independent.
  3. Figure 1: The caption states that α is chosen so that the one-loop contribution vanishes exactly in the limit κ→0. It would be useful to also show (perhaps in an inset or a second panel) how the result depends on the choice of α, to illustrate the scheme-dependence discussed in the text.
  4. References: Several arXiv references use future-dated identifiers (e.g., [8] arXiv:2512.20467, [26] arXiv:2603.01961, [31] arXiv:2504.13136, [32] arXiv:2603.12216, [33] arXiv:2605.13325, [64] arXiv:2605.27910, [67] arXiv:2506.15780). These should be verified for correctness.
  5. Section 2.2, Eqs. (17)-(18): The UV asymptotic expansions involve infinite sums over n and m, but the text states 'only a finite number of terms in the sums contribute.' It would help to specify which values of n and m contribute for the diagrams considered in this paper, at least for the leading UV divergence.
  6. Appendix B, Eqs. (131)-(140): Some expressions contain terms like '...H' (e.g., in Eq. 132 and Eq. 140). These should be checked for typographical completeness.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and constructive report. The three major comments all concern the scalar-sector analysis of Section 4 and are well-taken. We will address each by expanding the discussion in the revised manuscript: (1) specifying the WKB truncation order and the exactness of the UV cancellation, (2) adding a discussion of adiabaticity for smooth-but-rapid transitions typical of ultra slow-roll, and (3) promoting the IR-divergence caveat from a footnote to the main text, abstract, and conclusion. None of the referee's points require changes to our results or conclusions; they require clearer and more prominent exposition.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Section 4.2.1, around Eqs. (96)-(99): The UV cancellation in the scalar sector depends on the next-to-leading term in the large-momentum expansion of the time derivative of the WKB frequency W_p (Eq. 96). The text states this cancellation 'originates from the next-to-leading term in the large-momentum expansion of the time derivative of the frequency W_p,' but does not specify at what order in the 1/k expansion the WKB series is truncated for this cancellation to hold. Since the cancellation involves differentiating W_p with respect to time (Eq. 8), and the subleading terms depend on m_eff^2 and its derivatives, the authors should state explicitly: (i) which terms in the WKB expansion (Eq. 8) are retained for the scalar-sector UV analysis, and (ii) whether the cancellation is exact at the order retained or whether there are residual UV-divergent pieces from higher-order WKB terms that, [

    Authors: The referee is correct that the manuscript does not state the truncation order explicitly. We will revise the text to clarify both points. (i) For the scalar-sector UV analysis, the WKB frequency W_p is expanded to the first two terms: W_p = p + m_eff^2/(2p) + O(p^{-3}), as given in Eq. (8). The leading term p generates the UV divergence of the cubic diagram (Eq. 99), while the next-to-leading term m_eff^2/(2p) enters through the time derivative appearing in Eq. (96) and is responsible for the cancellation against the counterterm contribution fixed by tadpole renormalization. (ii) The cancellation is exact at the order retained: the UV-divergent (1/delta) piece cancels completely between the cubic diagram and the tadpole-induced counterterm when W_p is truncated at O(p^{-1}). Higher-order WKB terms (O(p^{-3}) and beyond) contribute only to the finite UV remainder, generating O(1/L) corrections that vanish in the L -> infinity limit, as explained in the general framework of Section 2. They do not produce residual UV poles. We will make both of these points explicit in the revised Section 4.2.1. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Section 4.2.1, Eq. (100): The epsilon-suppressed UV-divergent remnants are stated to be 'expected' because the fluctuation action is incomplete at O(epsilon). However, the paper's central claim of model-independent renormalization is applied to ultra slow-roll models where epsilon << 1 but higher slow-roll parameters are O(1). In such scenarios, the transition between slow-roll and ultra slow-roll phases can involve rapid (though smooth) time variation of m_eff^2. The adiabatic condition |d^n m_eff^2/d tau^n| << k^{n+2} is acknowledged to fail for abrupt transitions (Section 4, near Eq. 83), but the paper does not assess whether the condition holds sufficiently well for the smooth transitions typical of ultra slow-roll models. A brief discussion of the convergence properties of the WKB series for smooth-but-rapid transitions, and whether the truncation order used is adequate, would [

    Authors: This is a fair point and we will add a discussion of the adiabatic condition's applicability to smooth-but-rapid transitions. The key distinction is between abrupt transitions (where derivatives of m_eff^2 become formally singular and the WKB expansion breaks down) and smooth-but-rapid transitions (where all derivatives remain finite but some may be parametrically enhanced). For the smooth transitions typical of ultra slow-roll models, the adiabatic condition |d^n m_eff^2/d tau^n| << k^{n+2} is satisfied for sufficiently large loop momentum p, regardless of how rapid the transition is, because the right-hand side grows as p^{n+2}. The transition rapidity affects the value of p below which the WKB expansion ceases to be accurate, but not its validity in the UV region p > L where L is taken much larger than all physical scales. The truncation at O(p^{-1}) is adequate because higher-order terms are suppressed by additional powers of 1/p and contribute only to the finite remainder. We will add this discussion near the adiabatic condition in Section 4, making clear that the framework applies to smooth transitions of arbitrary rapidity, and that abrupt transitions (which are idealized approximations) would require separate treatment. revision: yes

  3. Referee: Section 4.2.1, Eq. (101) and footnote 11: The renormalized scalar spectrum (Eq. 101) is presented as finite and ready for application, yet footnote 11 acknowledges that the scalar spectrum 'develops IR divergences when one of the internal loop momenta becomes soft' and that 'a fully satisfactory treatment of these IR divergences lies beyond the scope of the present work.' This is a significant caveat that is not reflected in the abstract or the conclusion. The authors should clarify in the main text (not just a footnote) what the practical implications are: can Eq. (101) be evaluated as-is for phenomenological applications, or does the IR divergence render it ill-defined without additional regularization? At minimum, the abstract and Section 5 should acknowledge this limitation.

    Authors: The referee is right that this caveat should be more prominent. To clarify the practical implications: Eq. (101) is UV-finite and well-defined as written, but the IR integral over p in [0, L] can develop divergences when one of the internal loop momenta becomes soft (p -> 0), depending on the specific background and mass profile. This is a separate issue from the UV renormalization that is the focus of this paper. For phenomenological applications, the IR behavior must be assessed on a model-by-model basis: in some regimes the IR integral is finite and Eq. (101) can be evaluated directly; in others, additional IR regularization or resummation may be needed. We will (1) promote this discussion from footnote 11 to the main text of Section 4.2.1, (2) add a sentence to the abstract noting that the scalar spectrum is UV-finite but that IR divergences require separate treatment beyond the scope of this work, and (3) add a corresponding remark in Section 5. We emphasize that this does not affect the tensor-sector results of Section 3, where no such IR issue arises. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; self-citations are methodological, not load-bearing for the central claims

full rationale

The paper's central claims — that UV divergences of the tensor spectrum are absorbed by covariant gravitational EFT counterterms (Eq. 55) and that tadpole renormalization renders the scalar spectrum UV-finite (Eqs. 86, 96–99) — are derived within the paper from the standard WKB expansion (Eq. 8, citing Wentzel/Kramers/Brillouin [41–43]) and dimensional regularization (citing Bollini–Giambiagi, 't Hooft–Veltman [49–52]). The counterterm pole parts are fixed by the structural requirement of canceling the 1/δ pole extracted from the loop integrand, which is standard QFT renormalization, not a fit or a definition. The self-citations to [8] and [30] (same authors) provide the UV in-in computational algorithm and the dimensional-regularization implementation, but these are methodological tools: the WKB expansion is standard, the UV isolation procedure (Eqs. 10–12) follows from general properties of asymptotic series, and the counterterm basis (Eq. 26) is constructed from standard curvature invariants. The paper independently derives the UV divergence structure (Eq. 54 for tensors; Eqs. 96–99 for scalars), matches it to counterterms, and obtains the renormalized spectra (Eqs. 57, 101). The scalar-sector cancellation is described as recovering a result first pointed out in [27] (Kristiano & Yokoyama, external authors), which the present paper independently verifies via the WKB method. The finite counterterm parts (C_{f,i}, Z_ϕ) are explicitly left free for matching, so no 'prediction' is forced by construction. The self-citations raise the score to 2 (minor methodological dependency on same-author prior work), but the central derivation chain is self-contained against the standard QFT framework.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, dimensions, or conserved quantities. The counterterm coefficients (C_i, Z_ϕ, m̃^2_{f,χ}) are standard EFT parameters fixed by renormalization conditions. The displaced-mass profile (Eq. 60) is a specific model choice, not a new entity. The framework relies entirely on standard QFT tools (dimensional regularization, WKB, in-in formalism) applied to cosmological backgrounds.

free parameters (7)
  • C_{f,1} = undetermined
    Finite part of R^2 counterterm coefficient; fixed by renormalization condition or matching to data, not by the UV structure alone (Eq. 55).
  • C_{f,2} = undetermined
    Finite part of R_{μν}R^{μν} counterterm coefficient (Eq. 55).
  • C_{f,3} = undetermined
    Finite part of R_{μνρσ}R^{μνρσ} counterterm coefficient; no pole part (Eq. 55).
  • C_{f,4} = undetermined
    Finite part of □R counterterm coefficient; no pole part (Eq. 55).
  • m̃^2_{f,χ} = undetermined
    Finite part of non-minimal coupling counterterm Ṽ''(χ)R (Eq. 55).
  • Z_ϕ = undetermined
    Scalar field renormalization constant; finite, fixed by matching (Eq. 101).
  • α = chosen so spectrum vanishes at κ→0
    Finite counterterm combination in the de Sitter example, fixed by a renormalization condition (Fig. 1 caption).
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Internal loop modes admit asymptotic positive-frequency Bunch-Davies behavior in the far past: u_k(τ→-∞) ~ e^{-ikτ}/√(2k)
    Invoked in Eq. (36) and stated as 'the only model-dependent requirement' (Section 2, after Eq. 8). This constrains the effective mass and background evolution.
  • domain assumption The effective mass varies adiabatically: |d^n m_eff/dτ^n| << k^{n+2} for all n, ensuring WKB expansion validity
    Stated after Eq. (8) and again near Eq. (83). Fails for abrupt transitions, limiting applicability to some ultra slow-roll models.
  • domain assumption No IR divergences are present (tensor case) or IR divergences are beyond scope (scalar case)
    The IR/UV split at Eq. (10) assumes IR finiteness. For the scalar spectrum, IR divergences are acknowledged in footnote 11 but not treated.
  • domain assumption Spectator field energy density is negligible for background evolution (spectator regime)
    Stated in Section 3.1; scalar-tensor interactions mediated by lapse and shift are neglected, controlled by the small background velocity.
  • domain assumption Slow-roll parameter ε << 1 suppressed relative to higher slow-roll parameters (scalar spectrum regime)
    Section 4; lapse- and shift-mediated interactions are neglected. If relaxed, ε-suppressed UV-divergent remnants survive (Eq. 100).

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 40146 in / 3122 out tokens · 544437 ms · 2026-07-08T18:18:49.024175+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present a background-independent renormalization framework for one-loop primordial spectra. We apply it to two observables: the scalar-induced tensor spectrum sourced by a minimally coupled spectator field, and the scalar spectrum generated by potential self-interactions. In both cases, the UV part of the loops is isolated and, using the universal WKB behavior of the internal modes, the UV poles are extracted analytically and absorbed into local counterterms without having to specify either the background evolution or the full dynamics of the field running in the loop. This yields finite model-independent expressions for the renormalized spectra amenable to numerical analysis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06042 by Flavio Riccardi, Guillermo Ballesteros, Jes\'us Gamb\'in Egea.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Negative of the renormalized one-loop tensor spectrum in Eq. (65), normalized by (H/(πMP ))4 , as a function of κ. We set m2 f,χ = 0 and choose α so that the one-loop contribution vanishes exactly in the limit κ → 0. presented in Appendix B.1. At this stage, the only remaining loop integral is the finite IR contribution, (IR)P loop h , with loop momentum restricted to p ∈ [0, L], which, as mentioned, can a… view at source ↗

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

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages · 47 internal anchors

  1. [1]

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

    J. M. Maldacena, “Non-Gaussian features of primordial fluctuations in single field inflationary models,”JHEP05(2003) 013,arXiv:astro-ph/0210603

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  2. [2]

    Non-Gaussianity from Inflation: Theory and Observations

    N. Bartolo, E. Komatsu, S. Matarrese, and A. Riotto, “Non-Gaussianity from inflation: Theory and observations,”Phys. Rept.402(2004) 103–266,arXiv:astro-ph/0406398

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  3. [3]

    Primordial Non-Gaussianities from Inflation Models

    X. Chen, “Primordial Non-Gaussianities from Inflation Models,”Adv. Astron.2010(2010) 638979, arXiv:1002.1416 [astro-ph.CO]. 35

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  4. [4]

    Quantum Contributions to Cosmological Correlations

    S. Weinberg, “Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations,”Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 043514,arXiv:hep-th/0506236

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  5. [5]

    On Loops in Inflation

    L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga, “On Loops in Inflation,”JHEP12(2010) 008,arXiv:0912.2734 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  6. [6]

    Finite parts of inflationary loops II: A streamlined UV in-in algorithm and distinguishable signatures

    G. Ballesteros, J. Gamb´ ın Egea, and F. Riccardi, “Finite parts of inflationary loops II: A streamlined UV in-in algorithm and distinguishable signatures,”arXiv:2512.20467 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  7. [7]

    Improved Estimates of Cosmological Perturbations

    N. C. Tsamis and R. P. Woodard, “Improved estimates of cosmological perturbations,”Phys. Rev. D69(2004) 084005,arXiv:astro-ph/0307463

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  8. [8]

    Horizon crossing and inflation with large \eta

    W. H. Kinney, “Horizon crossing and inflation with large eta,”Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 023515, arXiv:gr-qc/0503017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  9. [9]

    Ultra Slow-Roll Inflation and the non-Gaussianity Consistency Relation

    J. Martin, H. Motohashi, and T. Suyama, “Ultra Slow-Roll Inflation and the non-Gaussianity Consistency Relation,”Phys. Rev. D87no. 2, (2013) 023514,arXiv:1211.0083 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  10. [10]

    Primordial black hole dark matter from single field inflation

    G. Ballesteros and M. Taoso, “Primordial black hole dark matter from single field inflation,”Phys. Rev. D97no. 2, (2018) 023501,arXiv:1709.05565 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  11. [11]

    Constraining Primordial Black Hole Formation from Single-Field Inflation

    J. Kristiano and J. Yokoyama, “Constraining Primordial Black Hole Formation from Single-Field Inflation,”Phys. Rev. Lett.132no. 22, (2024) 221003,arXiv:2211.03395 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    No-go for the formation of heavy mass Primordial Black Holes in Single Field Inflation

    S. Choudhury, M. R. Gangopadhyay, and M. Sami, “No-go for the formation of heavy mass Primordial Black Holes in Single Field Inflation,”Eur. Phys. J. C84no. 9, (2024) 884, arXiv:2301.10000 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    Revisiting Loop Corrections in Single Field USR Inflation

    H. Firouzjahi, “Revisiting loop corrections in single field ultraslow-roll inflation,”Phys. Rev. D109 no. 4, (2024) 043514,arXiv:2311.04080 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Note on the bispectrum and one-loop corrections in single-field inflation with primordial black hole formation

    J. Kristiano and J. Yokoyama, “Note on the bispectrum and one-loop corrections in single-field inflation with primordial black hole formation,”Phys. Rev. D109no. 10, (2024) 103541, arXiv:2303.00341 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    The Primordial Black Hole Formation from Single-Field Inflation is Still Not Ruled Out

    A. Riotto, “The Primordial Black Hole Formation from Single-Field Inflation is Still Not Ruled Out,”arXiv:2303.01727 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [16]

    The Primordial Black Hole Formation from Single-Field Inflation is Not Ruled Out

    A. Riotto, “The Primordial Black Hole Formation from Single-Field Inflation is Not Ruled Out,” arXiv:2301.00599 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  17. [17]

    Primordial Black Holes and Loops in Single-Field Inflation

    H. Firouzjahi and A. Riotto, “Primordial Black Holes and loops in single-field inflation,”JCAP02 (2024) 021,arXiv:2304.07801 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    One loop to rule them all: Perturbativity in the presence of ultra slow-roll dynamics

    G. Franciolini, A. Iovino Junior, M. Taoso, and A. Urbano, “Perturbativity in the presence of ultraslow-roll dynamics,”Phys. Rev. D109no. 12, (2024) 123550,arXiv:2305.03491 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    One-loop power spectrum in ultra slow-roll inflation and implications for primordial black hole dark matter

    G. Ballesteros and J. Gamb´ ın Egea, “One-loop power spectrum in ultra slow-roll inflation and implications for primordial black hole dark matter,”JCAP07(2024) 052,arXiv:2404.07196 [astro-ph.CO]. 36

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    Absence of one-loop effects on large scales from small scales in non-slow-roll dynamics

    J. Fumagalli, “Absence of one-loop effects on large scales from small scales in non-slow-roll dynamics,”JHEP05(2025) 162,arXiv:2305.19263 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Absence of one-loop effects on large scales from small scales in non-slow-roll dynamics II: Quartic interactions and consistency relations

    J. Fumagalli, “Absence of one-loop effects on large scales from small scales in non-slow-roll dynamics. Part 2. Quartic interactions and consistency relations,”JHEP01(2025) 108, arXiv:2408.08296 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Cancellation of quantum corrections on the soft curvature perturbations

    Y. Tada, T. Terada, and J. Tokuda, “Cancellation of quantum corrections on the soft curvature perturbations,”JHEP01(2024) 105,arXiv:2308.04732 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  23. [23]

    Superhorizon Curvature Perturbations Are Protected against One-Loop Corrections

    K. Inomata, “Superhorizon Curvature Perturbations Are Protected against One-Loop Corrections,” Phys. Rev. Lett.133no. 14, (2024) 141001,arXiv:2403.04682 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Cancellation of loop corrections to soft scalar power spectrum,

    Y. Ema, M. Hong, R. Jinno, and K. Mukaida, “Cancellation of loop corrections to soft scalar power spectrum,”arXiv:2603.01961 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  25. [25]

    Inflationary background renormalization

    J. Kristiano and J. Yokoyama, “Inflationary background renormalization,”arXiv:2504.18514 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    Cancellation of one-loop time dependence in superhorizon curvature perturbations from all scales

    K. Inomata, “Cancellation of one-loop time dependence in superhorizon curvature perturbations from all scales,”arXiv:2606.28247 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  27. [27]

    Role of the counterterms in the conservation of superhorizon curvature perturbations at one loop

    K. Inomata, “Role of the counterterms in the conservation of superhorizon curvature perturbations at one loop,”Phys. Rev. D111no. 12, (2025) 123517,arXiv:2502.12112 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    Finite parts of inflationary loops

    G. Ballesteros, J. Gamb´ ın Egea, and F. Riccardi, “Finite parts of inflationary loops,”JHEP06 (2025) 098,arXiv:2411.19674 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Freezing of the renormalized one-loop primordial scalar power spectrum,

    M. Braglia and L. Pinol, “Freezing of the renormalized one-loop primordial scalar power spectrum,”arXiv:2504.13136 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  30. [30]

    Scale-Dependent Loop Corrections to the Inflationary Power Spectrum,

    M. Braglia, S. C´ espedes, and L. Pinol, “Scale-Dependent Loop Corrections to the Inflationary Power Spectrum,”arXiv:2603.12216 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv

  31. [31]

    Fixing the Renormalization of Inflationary Loops via Ward Identities

    C.-J. Fang and Z.-K. Guo, “Fixing the Renormalization of Inflationary Loops via Ward Identities,” arXiv:2605.13325 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  32. [32]

    Brownian motion of a quantum oscillator,

    J. S. Schwinger, “Brownian motion of a quantum oscillator,”J. Math. Phys.2(1961) 407–432

    work page 1961

  33. [33]

    Expectation value formalism in quantum field theory. 1.,

    P. M. Bakshi and K. T. Mahanthappa, “Expectation value formalism in quantum field theory. 1.,” J. Math. Phys.4(1963) 1–11

    work page 1963

  34. [34]

    Expectation value formalism in quantum field theory. 2.,

    P. M. Bakshi and K. T. Mahanthappa, “Expectation value formalism in quantum field theory. 2.,” J. Math. Phys.4(1963) 12–16

    work page 1963

  35. [35]

    Diagram technique for nonequilibrium processes,

    L. V. Keldysh, “Diagram technique for nonequilibrium processes,”Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.47(1964) 1515–1527

    work page 1964

  36. [36]

    Lectures on Inflation

    L. Senatore, “Lectures on inflation,” inTheoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: New Frontiers in Fields and Strings, pp. 447–543. 2017.arXiv:1609.00716 [hep-th]. 37

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  37. [37]

    The "in-in" Formalism and Cosmological Perturbations

    P. Adshead, R. Easther, and E. A. Lim, “The ’in-in’ Formalism and Cosmological Perturbations,” Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 083521,arXiv:0904.4207 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  38. [38]

    Quantum Field Theory in de Sitter Space: Renormalization by Point Splitting,

    T. S. Bunch and P. C. W. Davies, “Quantum Field Theory in de Sitter Space: Renormalization by Point Splitting,”Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A360(1978) 117–134

    work page 1978

  39. [39]

    Eine Verallgemeinerung der Quantenbedingungen f¨ ur die Zwecke der Wellenmechanik,

    G. Wentzel, “Eine Verallgemeinerung der Quantenbedingungen f¨ ur die Zwecke der Wellenmechanik,”Z. Phys.38no. 6, (1926) 518–529

    work page 1926

  40. [40]

    Wellenmechanik und halbzahlige Quantisierung,

    H. A. Kramers, “Wellenmechanik und halbzahlige Quantisierung,”Z. Phys.39no. 10, (1926) 828–840

    work page 1926

  41. [41]

    La m´ ecanique ondulatoire de Schr¨ odinger; une m´ ethode g´ en´ erale de resolution par approximations successives,

    L. Brillouin, “La m´ ecanique ondulatoire de Schr¨ odinger; une m´ ethode g´ en´ erale de resolution par approximations successives,”Compt. Rend. Hebd. Seances Acad. Sci.183no. 1, (1926) 24–26

    work page 1926

  42. [42]

    Ultraviolet Divergences in Cosmological Correlations

    S. Weinberg, “Ultraviolet Divergences in Cosmological Correlations,”Phys. Rev. D83(2011) 063508,arXiv:1011.1630 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  43. [43]

    Relativistic cutoff for quantum electrodynamics,

    R. P. Feynman, “Relativistic cutoff for quantum electrodynamics,”Phys. Rev.74(1948) 1430–1438

    work page 1948

  44. [44]

    On Infinite Field Reactions in Quantum Field Theory,

    S.-I. Tomonaga and J. R. Oppenheimer, “On Infinite Field Reactions in Quantum Field Theory,” Phys. Rev.74(1948) 224–225

    work page 1948

  45. [45]

    On Radiative Corrections to Electron Scattering,

    J. Schwinger, “On Radiative Corrections to Electron Scattering,”Phys. Rev.75(1949) 898–899

    work page 1949

  46. [46]

    The Radiation theories of Tomonaga, Schwinger, and Feynman,

    F. J. Dyson, “The Radiation theories of Tomonaga, Schwinger, and Feynman,”Phys. Rev.75 (1949) 486–502

    work page 1949

  47. [47]

    Lowest order divergent graphs in nu-dimensional space,

    C. G. Bollini and J. J. Giambiagi, “Lowest order divergent graphs in nu-dimensional space,”Phys. Lett. B40(1972) 566–568

    work page 1972

  48. [48]

    Regularization and Renormalization of Gauge Fields,

    G. ’t Hooft and M. J. G. Veltman, “Regularization and Renormalization of Gauge Fields,”Nucl. Phys. B44(1972) 189–213

    work page 1972

  49. [49]

    Analytic renormalization via continuous space dimension,

    G. M. Cicuta and E. Montaldi, “Analytic renormalization via continuous space dimension,”Lett. Nuovo Cim.4(1972) 329–332

    work page 1972

  50. [50]

    A Method of Gauge Invariant Regularization,

    J. F. Ashmore, “A Method of Gauge Invariant Regularization,”Lett. Nuovo Cim.4(1972) 289–290

    work page 1972

  51. [51]

    The Dynamics of General Relativity

    R. L. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner, “The Dynamics of general relativity,”Gen. Rel. Grav. 40(2008) 1997–2027,arXiv:gr-qc/0405109

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  52. [52]

    The Effective Field Theory of Inflation

    C. Cheung, P. Creminelli, A. L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan, and L. Senatore, “The Effective Field Theory of Inflation,”JHEP03(2008) 014,arXiv:0709.0293 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  53. [53]

    Effective Field Theory for Inflation

    S. Weinberg, “Effective Field Theory for Inflation,”Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 123541, arXiv:0804.4291 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  54. [54]

    General relativity as an effective field theory: The leading quantum corrections

    J. F. Donoghue, “General relativity as an effective field theory: The leading quantum corrections,” Phys. Rev. D50(1994) 3874–3888,arXiv:gr-qc/9405057. 38

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  55. [55]

    Effective Field Theory of Gravity to All Orders

    M. Ruhdorfer, J. Serra, and A. Weiler, “Effective Field Theory of Gravity to All Orders,”JHEP05 (2020) 083,arXiv:1908.08050 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  56. [56]

    Inflation, Cosmic Perturbations and Non-Gaussianities

    Y. Wang, “Inflation, Cosmic Perturbations and Non-Gaussianities,”Commun. Theor. Phys.62 (2014) 109–166,arXiv:1303.1523 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  57. [57]

    A note on the role of the boundary terms for the non-Gaussianity in general k-inflation

    F. Arroja and T. Tanaka, “A note on the role of the boundary terms for the non-Gaussianity in general k-inflation,”JCAP05(2011) 005,arXiv:1103.1102 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  58. [58]

    Large slow-roll corrections to the bispectrum of noncanonical inflation

    C. Burrage, R. H. Ribeiro, and D. Seery, “Large slow-roll corrections to the bispectrum of noncanonical inflation,”JCAP07(2011) 032,arXiv:1103.4126 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  59. [59]

    No time to derive: unraveling total time derivatives in in-in perturbation theory

    M. Braglia and L. Pinol, “No time to derive: unraveling total time derivatives in in-in perturbation theory,”JHEP08(2024) 068,arXiv:2403.14558 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  60. [60]

    Gravitational Radiation in D-dimensional Spacetimes

    V. Cardoso, O. J. C. Dias, and J. P. S. Lemos, “Gravitational radiation in D-dimensional space-times,”Phys. Rev. D67(2003) 064026,arXiv:hep-th/0212168

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  61. [61]

    On Loops in Inflation III: Time Independence of zeta in Single Clock Inflation

    G. L. Pimentel, L. Senatore, and M. Zaldarriaga, “On Loops in Inflation III: Time Independence of zeta in Single Clock Inflation,”JHEP07(2012) 166,arXiv:1203.6651 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  62. [62]

    Matching second-order classical and 1-loop quantum tensor power spectra in de Sitter spacetime

    A. Hauser and M. Laine, “Matching second-order classical and 1-loop quantum tensor power spectra in de Sitter spacetime,”arXiv:2605.27910 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  63. [63]

    Semiclassical equations for homogeneous cosmologies with perturbations,

    A. Campos and E. Verdaguer, “Semiclassical equations for homogeneous cosmologies with perturbations,”Lect. Notes Phys.455(1995) 85–88

    work page 1995

  64. [64]

    One-loop gravitational wave spectrum in de Sitter spacetime

    M. B. Fr¨ ob, A. Roura, and E. Verdaguer, “One-loop gravitational wave spectrum in de Sitter spacetime,”JCAP08(2012) 009,arXiv:1205.3097 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  65. [65]

    Cancellation of one-loop correction to soft tensor power spectrum,

    Y. Ema, M. Hong, R. Jinno, and K. Mukaida, “Cancellation of one-loop correction to soft tensor power spectrum,”JCAP01(2026) 040,arXiv:2506.15780 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2026

  66. [66]

    Symmetries and Loops in Inflation

    V. Assassi, D. Baumann, and D. Green, “Symmetries and Loops in Inflation,”JHEP02(2013) 151,arXiv:1210.7792 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  67. [67]

    The constancy of \zeta in single-clock Inflation at all loops

    L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga, “The constancy ofζin single-clock Inflation at all loops,”JHEP 09(2013) 148,arXiv:1210.6048 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  68. [68]

    Quantum Contributions to Cosmological Correlations II: Can These Corrections Become Large?

    S. Weinberg, “Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations. II. Can these corrections become large?,”Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 023508,arXiv:hep-th/0605244. 39

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006