Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 4 cited by

This paper argues that a proposed magnetogenesis mechanism driven by ultralight dark matter survives closer scrutiny: a narrow parametric resonance channel, active even when the faster tachyonic channel fails, can still generate the observe

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

A narrow parametric resonance channel exists in axion-DM magnetogenesis, but its claimed dominance at very small couplings is undermined by unchecked expansion damping.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-04 challenge →

load-bearing objection The narrow-resonance calculation is a solid but routine extension; the small-coupling version of the claim doesn't survive the paper's own expansion check. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.04285 v2 pith:444PIT3O submitted 2026-02-04 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-phhep-th

Parametric Resonance and Backreaction Effects in Magnetogenesis from Ultralight Dark Matter

Nirmalya Brahma , Robert Brandenberger (McGill University) This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-phhep-th PACS 98.80.-k95.35.+d
keywords magnetogenesisultralight dark matteraxion-like couplingparametric resonanceMathieu equationtachyonic resonancebackreactioncosmological magnetic fields
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.

The reading

The paper re-examines a recently proposed mechanism in which a coherently oscillating ultralight dark matter field, coupled to electromagnetism through an axion-like interaction, generates cosmological magnetic fields at recombination. It establishes that, alongside the previously studied tachyonic instability, there is a narrow-band parametric resonance channel whose growth rate is only slightly smaller. In the small-coupling regime where the tachyonic channel is ineffective, this narrow channel still transfers enough energy into the gauge field to produce magnetic fields at the observed amplitudes. The paper further argues, analytically and with initial numerics, that backreaction does not terminate the resonance before an order-one fraction of the initial dark matter energy has flowed into the photons. The key open question, flagged by the authors themselves, is whether a full numerical treatment—especially one including cosmic expansion—confirms these estimates.

Core claim

The central claim is that the axion–photon system described by the Mathieu equation possesses two instability channels: the tachyonic band for k < k_c and a narrow parametric resonance band centered at k ≈ a m/2 with Floquet exponent μ_p = (1/4) g_φγ m Φ, a numerical factor smaller than the tachyonic exponent. The paper shows that for couplings below roughly g̃_φγ < 10^{-9}, the tachyonic resonance becomes ineffective because the per-burst amplification is too small, and the narrow resonance takes over—still strong enough to yield magnetic fields, via inverse cascade, that satisfy the blazar bounds. On backreaction, the paper estimates that neither the depletion of the condensate, nor the ba

What carries the argument

The mode equation for the electromagnetic field is the Mathieu equation with oscillating mass term. The narrow resonance band sits at δ = 1/4 (i.e. k ≈ a m/2), has width Δk = (1/2) a m Φ g_φγ, and the Floquet exponent is μ_p = (1/4) g_φγ m Φ. The paper also adapts a two-time perturbative method to show that a slowly decreasing coupling amplitude (backreaction) does not destroy the band, only slightly lowering the exponent, and identifies the efficiency criterion g̃_φγ m_20^{-1} >> 1 that separates tachyonic-dominated from narrow-dominated regimes.

Load-bearing premise

The whole argument rests on the resonance acting faster than cosmic expansion (growth rate larger than the Hubble rate), but the paper verifies this condition only for the tachyonic channel (g̃ > 10^{-4}), not for the narrow channel in the very-small-coupling regime where it claims the mechanism still works.

What would settle it

Run a full 3D lattice simulation of the axion–photon system at recombination, including cosmic expansion, with g̃_φγ < 10^{-9} and m_20 of order ten, and measure the fraction F of dark matter energy converted into gauge fields; if F comes out far below 10^{-2} or the k ≈ a m/2 modes are visibly Hubble-damped, the narrow-resonance claim collapses. A cleaner minimal test: directly check the self-consistency inequality μ_p > H using the paper's own numbers (mΦ ~ T_R²) in the claimed regime.

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

If this is right

  • For couplings below g̃_φγ ~ 10^{-9}, photons are produced at high momenta near k ≈ a m/2, and inverse cascade transfers this power to Mpc scales, predicting B(1 Mpc) ~ m_20^{-1} 10^{-9} Gauss—consistent with observations if the converted fraction F is of order one.
  • The efficiency criterion g̃_φγ m_20^{-1} >> 1 cleanly marks the boundary between tachyonic-dominated and narrow-resonance-dominated magnetogenesis; below the threshold only the narrow channel operates.
  • Backreaction constraints from the energy budget, zero-mode depletion, and induced φ fluctuations are all weaker than the basic energy conservation bound, so the resonance can in principle transfer an O(1) fraction of the dark matter energy density.
  • The energy-transfer estimates (ρ_T ~ g̃^4 10^{-76} eV^4, ρ_narrow ~ g̃ 10^{-80} eV^4) show that the narrow channel overtakes the tachyonic one only when the coupling is very small, sharpening where each mechanism should be sought.
  • The numerical agreement with the narrow-band Floquet exponent in the small-coupling case indicates the resonance is real and not an artifact of the analytic approximation, though only selected modes were evolved.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Using the paper's own relation mΦ ~ T_R² and its estimates, the narrow-dominated regime g̃ < 10^{-9} appears to violate the μ > H fast-resonance condition (μ_p/H ~ 0.075), so whether Hubble damping actually suppresses the narrow channel is the missing check; a lattice simulation including expansion would settle it.
  • The same Mathieu machinery governs gauge preheating after axion inflation, so this work suggests a two-stage picture: a narrow resonance seeds small-scale fields whose helicity structure may differ from the tachyonic seed, altering the predicted spectral index at Mpc scales in a way future Faraday-rotation or spectral-distortion surveys could distinguish.
  • A testable extension: in the narrow-dominated regime the seed spectrum peaks at k ≈ a m/2 rather than k_c, so the initial field scale is much smaller; measuring the coherence scale of intergalactic fields could indicate which channel actually operated.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper revisits a magnetogenesis mechanism in which a coherently oscillating ultralight axion-like dark matter field, coupled via an F∧F interaction, generates cosmological magnetic fields at recombination. It studies a narrow parametric resonance band centered at k≈a m/2 in addition to the previously considered tachyonic channel, analyzes back-reaction effects on the resonance using analytic estimates and a two-mode numerical toy model, and claims that for very small couplings (g~≲10^-9) the tachyonic channel shuts off while the narrow channel still transfers an O(1) fraction of the dark-matter energy into gauge fields, producing observable magnetic fields.

Significance. If the narrow-resonance claim were established, the paper would extend the ULDM magnetogenesis scenario into a regime where the tachyonic channel is ineffective and would provide a back-reaction estimate that the mechanism is robust. The basic application of Floquet/Mathieu theory is standard and the two-time treatment of a slowly varying resonance parameter is a useful analytic device; the derivation of the Floquet exponents is internally consistent, and the comparison with inflationary preheating is appropriate. However, the central quantitative claim is not supported: the paper checks the expansion-negligibility condition only for the tachyonic channel, and its own equations imply that for the claimed small-coupling regime the narrow-resonance growth rate is far below the Hubble rate. The abstract's order-one energy-transfer statement is also contradicted by the paper's own concession in Section VI that a full numerical study is needed for the narrow-only case.

major comments (3)
  1. [§II, Eq. (21); §IV, Eq. (40)] The small-coupling narrow-channel claim is missing the expansion-consistency check that the paper itself performs for the tachyonic channel. §II states the hypothesis that the resonance is fast on the expansion time scale, but §IV only verifies it for the tachyonic channel, giving g~>10^-4 (Eq. 40). For the narrow channel, combining Eq. (13) (mΦ∼T_R^2) with Eq. (21) (μ_p=(1/4)gΦm) at recombination (T_R≈0.3 eV, H≈3×10^-38 GeV) yields μ_p/H≈(1/4)g T_R^2/H≈0.075 for g~=10^-9. Thus in the g~≲10^-9 regime highlighted in the abstract, the Mathieu-equation growth rate is not large compared with Hubble damping, so the constant-a Floquet analysis is not applicable. Moreover k_p=a m/2 is time-dependent in the expanding background, making the constant-a Floquet exponent a poor growth indicator. This is a load-bearing point for the paper's central claim.
  2. [§II, Eqs. (22)-(23); §IV, Eqs. (38)-(48); §VI] The claim that a fraction F=O(1) of the dark-matter energy can be converted is not supported for the narrow-only regime. The back-reaction bounds in §IV are derived from the tachyonic channel (ρ_A∼k_c^4 e^{2μ_T t}, Eq. 37) and are not transferred to the narrow channel, which has a different Floquet exponent and a different phase-space factor (Eqs. 22-23). The paper itself states in §VI that "if only the narrow resonance channel is open, then a full numerical study is required to determine the value of F (this study is currently in progress)." The abstract nevertheless claims without qualification that "a fraction of order one of the initial dark matter density can flow into the gauge fields." The analytic back-reaction analysis therefore does not establish the headline conclusion.
  3. [§V, Figs. 1-3] The numerical support for the small-coupling regime is thin. The simulation follows only two fixed k modes, and for k_T=0.5k_c the authors report that the code breaks down after a few oscillations (Fig. 1). For the small-coupling case g~=1 (Fig. 3) the growth rate agrees with the analytic narrow-resonance exponent, but no run is shown for g~<10^-9, where μ_p/H≪1 (see first major comment), and no simulation follows back-reaction until saturation to demonstrate F=O(1). Thus the numerical study does not establish the abstract's robustness claim for the parameter region in which the narrow channel is claimed to dominate.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§II, Eq. (11)] The symbol A_k is used both for the gauge-field mode amplitude and for the dimensionless Mathieu parameter (k/(am))^2. Rename one of them to avoid confusion.
  2. [§II and §IV] The definition of H differs: §II says "H is the Hubble constant at the time of reheating," while §IV says "H is the expansion rate at recombination." Since the mechanism operates at recombination, the wording in §II should be corrected.
  3. [§IV, Eq. (51)] The text uses "criterium" instead of "criterion" in and around Eq. (51).
  4. [§V, figure captions] The figures are referenced by number but the captions should more explicitly define the dotted, dashed, and solid curves and the vertical scale; in the present text the reader must rely on the prose to identify them.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the narrow-resonance and backreaction calculations are independent applications of Mathieu theory; the main caveats are self-consistency and an unquantified F for the narrow channel, which are correctness concerns, not circularity.

full rationale

No load-bearing step reduces to its own input. The narrow-band Floquet exponent μ_p = (1/4) g_{φγ} mΦ (Eq. 21) is obtained directly from the Mathieu form of the mode equation (Eqs. 11-20) with stated parameters (mass, coupling, amplitude), not by fitting the target field strength or observed B. The stability and backreaction estimates in §§III-IV are independent order-of-magnitude calculations; the 'fraction F' is not a fitted parameter chosen to reproduce magnetic-field data. The field-strength estimate uses B(k_c) ~ F^{1/2} Gauss from prior work [1]; although [1] shares an author, it is a published, externally checkable result, and the present paper's new claims concern the existence and efficiency of a separate narrow-resonance channel. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz-via-citation, or renaming is involved. The substantive weaknesses are physical, not circular: the paper states in §II that it works 'under the hypothesis that the resonance is fast on the expansion time scale', but the self-consistency check in §IV (g̃ > 10^{-4}, Eq. 40) is performed only for the tachyonic channel. For the narrow-channel regime g̃ < 10^{-9}, using the paper's own relation mΦ ~ T_R^2 (Eq. 13) and μ_p (Eq. 21) gives μ_p/H of order 0.1 at recombination, so the fast-resonance hypothesis may fail there. Likewise, §VI concedes 'if only the narrow resonance channel is open, then a full numerical study is required to determine the value of F', while the abstract states that a fraction of order one can flow into gauge fields. These are consistency/overclaiming issues and should be weighed as correctness risk, but they do not make the derivation circular.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central estimates are order-of-magnitude calculations built on standard Mathieu theory plus several domain assumptions inherited from prior work: coherent φ condensate, mΦ~T_R^2, negligible plasma, and inverse-cascade scaling. No new entities are introduced. The weak point is the unchecked fast-resonance assumption for the narrow channel at small coupling.

free parameters (3)
  • g̃ (normalized axion-photon coupling) = 5×10^2 and 1 in numerical examples; externally bounded ≪1
    Input coupling in Lagrangian (Eq. 1); not fitted to target data, but the central regime claim g̃<10^-9 depends on its value.
  • m20 (m/10^-20 eV) = 10^2 in numerical examples; lower bound >10 from [4]
    Input mass parameter; scales B estimate via m20^-1 in Eq. (25).
  • Φ (initial oscillation amplitude) = set by mΦ~T_R^2 (Eq. 13)
    Order-of-magnitude relation inherited from [1,3]; central rates μ ~ g m Φ scale linearly with it.
axioms (6)
  • standard math Mathieu/Floquet theory for the mode equation with oscillatory mass term
    Used in §II to identify resonance bands and Floquet exponents; rigorous for constant coefficients.
  • domain assumption φ oscillates coherently and homogeneously with amplitude Φ
    Required for the time-periodic mass; justified by misalignment mechanism [3].
  • domain assumption mΦ~T_R^2 at recombination (Eq. 13)
    Sets the amplitude scale; if wrong, all Floquet exponents and k_c shift.
  • domain assumption Resonance is fast compared to expansion (μ>H)
    Stated as hypothesis in §II; checked for tachyonic channel in §IV but not for narrow channel.
  • domain assumption Plasma effects negligible after recombination and vacuum initial conditions for A
    Inherited from [1]; gives A_k=1/sqrt(2k) initial amplitude in §IV.
  • domain assumption Inverse cascade scaling B(k)~(k/kc)^n for non-helical/helical components
    Used in Eq. (9) and (25) to extrapolate from k_c to 1 Mpc; from [7].

reviewed 2026-08-04 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Parametric Resonance and Backreaction Effects in Magnetogenesis from Ultralight Dark Matter." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/444PIT3O

@misc{pith2026260204285,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Parametric Resonance and Backreaction Effects in Magnetogenesis from Ultralight Dark Matter},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/444PIT3O}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.04285}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We take a more detailed look at the recently proposed magnetogenesis mechanism triggered by ultralight dark matter coupled to electromagnetism. The proposed mechanism made use of a tachyonic resonance channel which leads to the exponential amplification of infrared modes. Here, we first investigate a possible narrow band parametric resonance channel which can produce photons at higher frequencies. Secondly, we estimate the effects of back-reaction on terminating the resonance. We find that there is indeed a narrow resonance channel. It is characterized by a Floquet exponent which is slightly smaller than the corresponding exponent for the tachyonic resonance. However, there is a region of parameter space (corresponding to a very small coupling constant) for which the tachyonic resonance is ineffective. In this case, the narrow resonance will dominate, and it will still be sufficiently strong to generate the observed magnetic fields on cosmological scales. Our analytical treatment of the back-reaction effects considered here indicates that a fraction of order one of the initial dark matter density can flow into the gauge fields. Hence, our magnetogenesis scenario appears to be robust to back-reaction effects.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.04285 by Nirmalya Brahma, Robert Brandenberger (McGill University).

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Evolution of the gauge field mode [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Evolution of the gauge field mode [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Indirect Parametric Resonance of the Electromagnetic Field Driven by an Oscillating SU(2) Dark Matter Condensate

    hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    An oscillating homogeneous SU(2) condensate indirectly induces parametric resonance in U(1) helicity modes via a pseudoscalar mediator, producing a Hill equation that reduces to Mathieu form with derived resonance con...

  2. Symbiotic Magnetogenesis during Radiation Domination

    astro-ph.HE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    A symbiotic axion-dilaton system sources a moderately chiral dark U(1) magnetic field of astrophysically relevant strength during radiation domination through tachyonic amplification without fine-tuning.

  3. Suppressed Magnetogenesis from Ultralight Dark Matter due to Finite Conductivity

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Finite conductivity of the plasma suppresses parametric resonance amplification of electromagnetic fields from ultralight pseudoscalar dark matter, making it impossible to generate magnetic fields of sufficient streng...

  4. Secondary Production of Photons from ALP Dark Matter interacting with a Cosmological Magnetic Field

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    ALP dark matter coupled to EM via Chern-Simons produces secondary photons from fluctuations in a pre-existing cosmological magnetic field spectrum, with Lyman-Werner flux consistent with CMB and X-ray limits.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

26 extracted references · 14 linked inside Pith · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    preheating

    Assuming that the dark matter consists of a pseu- doscalar fieldϕwhich is oscillating uniformly on cos- mological scales 2 and which is coupled via a axion-like ΦF∧Fcoupling to the field strength tensorFof elec- tromagnetism, it was pointed out that there is a tachy- onic resonance which leads to exponential excitation of infrared modes of the electromagn...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  2. [2]

    Late Time Mag- netogenesis from Ultralight Scalar Dark Matter,

    V. Kamali and R. Brandenberger, “Late Time Mag- netogenesis from Ultralight Scalar Dark Matter,” [arXiv:2601.00443 [astro-ph.CO]]

    arXiv

  3. [3]

    Cosmologi- cal Magnetic Fields from Ultralight Dark Matter,

    R. Brandenberger, J. Fr¨ ohlich and H. Jiao, “Cosmologi- cal Magnetic Fields from Ultralight Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. Lett.136, no.3, 031001 (2026) doi:10.1103/ys32- 853g [arXiv:2502.19310 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  4. [4]

    Updated bounds on ultra-light dark matter from the tiniest galaxies,

    S. May, N. Dalal and A. Kravtsov, “Updated bounds on ultra-light dark matter from the tiniest galaxies,” [arXiv:2509.02781 [astro-ph.CO]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  5. [5]

    Noninflationary axion and ALP mis- alignment mechanism,

    R. Brandenberger, “Noninflationary axion and ALP mis- alignment mechanism,” Phys. Rev. D112, no.10, 103523 (2025) doi:10.1103/k3hh-gszm [arXiv:2507.00785 [hep- ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Ciaran O’Hare’s website http://cajihare.github.io/AxionLimits/

  7. [7]

    Axion Cosmology,

    D. J. E. Marsh, “Axion Cosmology,” Phys. Rept. 643, 1-79 (2016) doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2016.06.005 [arXiv:1510.07633 [astro-ph.CO]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  8. [8]

    Extra- galactic magnetic fields constraints from simultaneous GeV-TeV observations of blazars,

    A. M. Taylor, I. Vovk and A. Neronov, “Extra- galactic magnetic fields constraints from simultaneous GeV-TeV observations of blazars,” Astron. Astrophys. 529, A144 (2011) doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201116441 [arXiv:1101.0932 [astro-ph.HE]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  9. [9]

    Cosmological Mag- netic Fields: Their Generation, Evolution and Ob- servation,

    R. Durrer and A. Neronov, “Cosmological Mag- netic Fields: Their Generation, Evolution and Ob- servation,” Astron. Astrophys. Rev.21, 62 (2013) doi:10.1007/s00159-013-0062-7 [arXiv:1303.7121 [astro- ph.CO]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  10. [10]

    On Particle Creation By A Time Dependent Scalar Field,

    A. D. Dolgov and D. P. Kirilova, “On Particle Creation By A Time Dependent Scalar Field,” Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 51, 172 (1990) [Yad. Fiz.51, 273 (1990)]

    1990

  11. [11]

    Par- ticle Production During Out-of-equilibrium Phase Transitions,

    J. H. Traschen and R. H. Brandenberger, “Par- ticle Production During Out-of-equilibrium Phase Transitions,” Phys. Rev. D42, 2491 (1990). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.42.2491

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.42.2491 1990

  12. [12]

    Universe reheating after inflation,

    Y. Shtanov, J. H. Traschen and R. H. Branden- berger, “Universe reheating after inflation,” Phys. Rev. D51, 5438-5455 (1995) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.51.5438 [arXiv:hep-ph/9407247 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  13. [13]

    Reheating after inflation,

    L. Kofman, A. D. Linde and A. A. Starobin- sky, “Reheating after inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 3195-3198 (1994) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.73.3195 [arXiv:hep-th/9405187 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  14. [14]

    Infla- ton decay and heavy particle production with nega- tive coupling,

    B. R. Greene, T. Prokopec and T. G. Roos, “Infla- ton decay and heavy particle production with nega- tive coupling,” Phys. Rev. D56, 6484-6507 (1997) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.56.6484 [arXiv:hep-ph/9705357 [hep-ph]]; G. N. Felder, J. Garcia-Bellido, P. B. Greene, L. Kof- man, A. D. Linde and I. Tkachev, “Dynamics of symme- try breaking and tachyonic preheating...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  15. [15]

    two time method

    and [16]. Returning to our case, we will, as done in [9] in the context of reheating, work under the hypothesis that the resonance is fast on the expansion time scale (at the end of the analysis we will check for self-consistency of this assumption). In this case, we can neglect the expansion of space and set conformal timeηequal to physical time t. We ca...

    2010

  16. [16]

    To- wards the theory of reheating after inflation,

    L. Kofman, A. D. Linde and A. A. Starobinsky, “To- wards the theory of reheating after inflation,” Phys. Rev. D56, 3258-3295 (1997) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.56.3258 [arXiv:hep-ph/9704452 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  17. [17]

    Reheating in Inflationary Cosmology: Theory and Applications,

    R. Allahverdi, R. Brandenberger, F. Y. Cyr-Racine and A. Mazumdar, “Reheating in Inflationary Cosmology: Theory and Applications,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60, 27 (2010) doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.012809.104511 [arXiv:1001.2600 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2010

  18. [18]

    Nonperturbative Dynamics Of Reheat- ing After Inflation: A Review,

    M. A. Amin, M. P. Hertzberg, D. I. Kaiser and J. Karouby, “Nonperturbative Dynamics Of Reheat- ing After Inflation: A Review,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D24, 1530003 (2014) doi:10.1142/S0218271815300037 [arXiv:1410.3808 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  19. [19]

    Theory and Applications of Mathieu Functions

    N.W. McLachlan, “Theory and Applications of Mathieu Functions” (Oxford Univ. Press, Clarendon, 1947)

    1947

  20. [20]

    Hill Equation

    W. Magnus, “Hill Equation” (Interscience, New York, 1966); F. Arscott, “Periodic Differential Equations” (MacMil- lan, New York, 1964)

    1966

  21. [21]

    Mathieu’s Equation and its Generalizations: Overview of Stability Charts and their Features

    I. Kovacic, R. Rand and S. M. Sah, “Mathieu’s Equation and its Generalizations: Overview of Stability Charts and their Features”, Applied Mechanics Reviews,70, 020802- 1 (2018)

    2018

  22. [22]

    Mechanics

    L. D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, “Mechanics” (Vol 1, Course of Theoretical Physics), 3rd ed., Pergamon Press, 1986

    1986

  23. [23]

    Mathematical Methods of Classical Me- chanics,

    V. I. Arnold, “Mathematical Methods of Classical Me- chanics,” Springer, 1989, doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2063-1

    doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2063-1 1989

  24. [24]

    Sur les ´ equations diff´ erentielles lin´ eaires ` a coefficients p´ eriodiques

    G. Floquet, “Sur les ´ equations diff´ erentielles lin´ eaires ` a coefficients p´ eriodiques”, Annales Scientifiques de l’ ´Ecole Normale Sup´ erieure,12, 47-88 (1883) doi:10.24033/asens.220

    doi:10.24033/asens.220

  25. [25]

    Gauge-preheating and the end of ax- ion inflation,

    P. Adshead, J. T. Giblin, T. R. Scully and E. I. Sfakianakis, “Gauge-preheating and the end of ax- ion inflation,” JCAP12, 034 (2015) doi:10.1088/1475- 7516/2015/12/034 [arXiv:1502.06506 [astro-ph.CO]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  26. [26]

    Magnetogenesis from axion in- flation,

    P. Adshead, J. T. Giblin, T. R. Scully and E. I. Sfakianakis, “Magnetogenesis from axion in- flation,” JCAP10, 039 (2016) doi:10.1088/1475- 7516/2016/10/039 [arXiv:1606.08474 [astro-ph.CO]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 4, 2026.