pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.14455 · v3 · pith:ARLJTRZVnew · submitted 2025-12-16 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · hep-ph

Isocurvature-induced features in multi-field Higgs-R² inflation

Flavio Pineda , Luis O. Pimentel This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 13:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO hep-ph
keywords inflationprimordial perturbationsisocurvature modesHiggs inflationmultifield dynamicscurvature power spectrumCMB observables
0
0 comments X

The pith

Moderate non-minimal coupling in multi-field Higgs-R^2 inflation transfers adiabatic and isocurvature modes to create localized features in the primordial curvature power spectrum.

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

The paper examines how the Higgs non-minimal coupling controls the evolution of primordial perturbations in a multi-field Higgs-R^2 inflation model that includes non-minimal kinetic mixing between the Higgs and the scalaron. For values of the coupling around 0.1, a temporary turn in the inflationary trajectory mixes adiabatic and isocurvature modes, which imprints localized features onto the curvature power spectrum. In the much weaker coupling regime the curvature spectrum stays nearly smooth, yet isocurvature perturbations survive to the end of inflation and leave a residual component. These two regimes produce different patterns in the predicted CMB angular power spectra and thereby offer observational tests of the model parameters.

Core claim

In Higgs-R^2 inflation with non-minimal kinetic mixing, the value of the Higgs non-minimal coupling ξ_h divides the dynamics into two regimes. When ξ_h is of order 0.1, transient turning of the multi-field trajectory induces a transfer between adiabatic and isocurvature modes that generates localized features in the primordial curvature power spectrum. When ξ_h is much less than 1, the curvature spectrum remains nearly featureless while isocurvature perturbations do not decay completely, leaving a residual isocurvature component at the end of inflation. The associated CMB angular power spectra carry the distinct signatures of each regime.

What carries the argument

transient turning of the inflationary trajectory that converts adiabatic and isocurvature modes when the Higgs non-minimal coupling reaches order 0.1

If this is right

  • Localized features develop in the primordial curvature power spectrum for moderate values of the non-minimal coupling.
  • Isocurvature perturbations persist undamped in the weak-coupling limit and contribute to late-time observables.
  • The CMB angular power spectra acquire distinct patterns that depend on the value of the Higgs non-minimal coupling.
  • Matching these predictions to data constrains the viable parameter space of multi-field Higgs-R^2 inflation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • High-resolution CMB observations could separate the two regimes and bound the allowed strength of the kinetic mixing term.
  • Residual isocurvature modes in the weak-coupling case might source secondary effects relevant to dark-matter or large-scale structure studies.
  • Analogous mode-conversion processes may appear in other multi-field models with non-minimal couplings, motivating targeted searches for spectral features.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes that the chosen functional form of the non-minimal kinetic mixing term correctly captures the model and that the numerical solutions of the linear perturbation equations remain accurate without artifacts across the studied range of couplings.

What would settle it

Future CMB measurements that either detect or rule out localized features in the scalar power spectrum at the comoving scales corresponding to the duration of the trajectory turn would confirm or refute the mode-transfer mechanism for moderate coupling.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.14455 by Flavio Pineda, Luis O. Pimentel.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Scalar potential [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Evolution of the slow-roll parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Numerical solution of equations (33) and (34) for the space parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Primordial power spectrum for adiabatic (left panel) and isocurvature (right panel) per [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Primordial power spectra for curvature [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Adiabatic primordial power spectrum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Comparison of the TT angular power spectrum for two representative values of the Higgs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Angular power spectra for the TE cross-correlation (left panel) and EE polarization (right [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We study primordial perturbations in Higgs--$R^2$ inflation in the presence of non-minimal kinetic mixing between the Higgs field and the scalaron. By numerically solving the multifield background and linear perturbation equations, we identify distinct dynamical regimes controlled by the Higgs non-minimal coupling $\xi_h$. For $\xi_h \sim \mathcal{O}(0.1)$, transient turning of the inflationary trajectory leads to a transfer between adiabatic and isocurvature modes, generating localized features in the primordial curvature power spectrum. In contrast, in the weak-coupling regime $\xi_h \ll 1$, the curvature spectrum remains nearly featureless while isocurvature perturbations do not fully decay, resulting in a residual isocurvature component at the end of inflation. We compute the associated CMB angular power spectra and discuss the observational implications of these regimes. Our results highlight the role of multifield dynamics in shaping primordial perturbations and provide constraints on viable realizations of Higgs--$R^2$ inflation.

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 numerically solves the background and linear perturbation equations for multi-field Higgs-R² inflation with non-minimal kinetic mixing between the Higgs and scalaron. It identifies two regimes controlled by the Higgs non-minimal coupling ξ_h: for ξ_h ∼ O(0.1), transient trajectory turning transfers power between adiabatic and isocurvature modes, producing localized features in the primordial curvature power spectrum; for ξ_h ≪ 1 the curvature spectrum remains nearly featureless while isocurvature modes leave a residual component at the end of inflation. CMB angular power spectra are computed and observational implications are discussed.

Significance. If the numerical results are robust, the work shows how multifield dynamics with non-minimal kinetic mixing can generate observable features or residual isocurvature in a well-studied inflation model, offering potential CMB constraints on viable parameter space and highlighting the role of trajectory turning in shaping primordial spectra.

major comments (1)
  1. [numerical results for weak-coupling regime (around the perturbation evolution and power-spectrum plots)] The central distinction between regimes rests on the claim that isocurvature perturbations do not fully decay for ξ_h ≪ 1. This is obtained solely from numerical integration of the linear perturbation equations, yet no convergence tests, step-size studies, or comparison against the analytic decoupled limit (vanishing mixing term) are described. Without such verification the residual isocurvature amplitude could be an integration artifact, which is load-bearing for the weak-coupling regime conclusion.
minor comments (2)
  1. [methods / numerical implementation] The abstract states that background and linear perturbation equations are solved numerically, but the main text would benefit from explicit mention of the integrator, tolerances, and number of e-folds evolved to allow reproducibility.
  2. [model setup] Notation for the non-minimal kinetic mixing term could be clarified with an explicit Lagrangian term or matrix form early in the model section to aid readers unfamiliar with the specific coupling.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the concern about numerical verification in the weak-coupling regime below and will revise the paper to incorporate additional checks that strengthen the robustness of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [numerical results for weak-coupling regime (around the perturbation evolution and power-spectrum plots)] The central distinction between regimes rests on the claim that isocurvature perturbations do not fully decay for ξ_h ≪ 1. This is obtained solely from numerical integration of the linear perturbation equations, yet no convergence tests, step-size studies, or comparison against the analytic decoupled limit (vanishing mixing term) are described. Without such verification the residual isocurvature amplitude could be an integration artifact, which is load-bearing for the weak-coupling regime conclusion.

    Authors: We agree that explicit documentation of numerical convergence and comparison to the analytic limit is necessary to confirm the reliability of the residual isocurvature in the weak-coupling regime. Although our integrations employ standard adaptive-step integrators with conservative error tolerances, the manuscript does not present dedicated convergence studies or the ξ_h → 0 limit. We will add a new appendix (or subsection) that includes: (i) results obtained with successively tighter step-size tolerances and error controls, demonstrating convergence of the isocurvature power spectrum to within a few percent; and (ii) a direct numerical comparison to the decoupled analytic case with the kinetic mixing term set identically to zero, in which the isocurvature modes decay as expected and leave no residual amplitude. These additions will show that the reported residual for small but finite ξ_h is a physical consequence of the weak mixing rather than a numerical artifact, thereby reinforcing the distinction between the two dynamical regimes. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results from direct numerical integration

full rationale

The paper obtains its regime distinctions and spectral features by numerically integrating the multifield background and linear perturbation equations for varying ξ_h. No parameters are fitted to the output spectra, no self-definitional relations appear, and no load-bearing self-citations or imported uniqueness theorems reduce the claims to inputs by construction. The residual isocurvature for ξ_h ≪ 1 follows from the dynamics when the kinetic mixing term is small, making the derivation self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on the assumed presence and form of the non-minimal kinetic mixing term and on the validity of the linear perturbation equations in the chosen frame; no new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • ξ_h
    The Higgs non-minimal coupling is varied parametrically to delineate the two regimes; its specific value is not derived from first principles or fitted to external data in the abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The inflationary action contains a non-minimal kinetic mixing term between the Higgs and the scalaron in addition to the standard Higgs-R² potential.
    This mixing term is the key modeling choice that enables the reported transfer between adiabatic and isocurvature modes.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5706 in / 1465 out tokens · 41369 ms · 2026-05-22T13:11:52.350842+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Echoes of $R^3$ modification and Goldstone preheating in the CMB-BAO landscape

    hep-ph 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    An R^3 modification to R^2-Higgs inflation fits the high n_s by inducing Goldstone preheating that reconciles CMB and inflationary energy scales.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    As discussed in Ref

    Caseξ h ≪1 This scenario simplifies both the isocurvature massm 2 iso and the turning rateη ⊥ within one of the valleys. As discussed in Ref. [34], the potential loses its two-valley structure, which degenerates into a single valley centered ath= 0. Consequently, the dynamics may commence within the valley or precisely on the ridge, from where the field e...

    work page

  2. [2]

    We find that the isocurvature component is strongly anti-correlated with the adiabatic mode at the moment of horizon crossing for the pivot scale

    Caseξ h ∼ O(10 −1) For the parameter space whereξ h ∼0.1, we observe a distinct phenomenological behavior compared to the small coupling limit. We find that the isocurvature component is strongly anti-correlated with the adiabatic mode at the moment of horizon crossing for the pivot scale. However,P S is fully suppressed during super-Hubble evolution, yie...

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    A. H. Guth, Phys. Rev. D23, 347 (1981)

    work page 1981

  4. [4]

    Linde, Physics Letters B108, 389 (1982)

    A. Linde, Physics Letters B108, 389 (1982)

    work page 1982

  5. [5]

    A. R. Liddle and S. M. Leach, Phys. Rev. D68, 103503 (2003)

    work page 2003

  6. [6]

    E. D. Stewart and D. H. Lyth, Physics Letters B302, 171 (1993)

    work page 1993

  7. [7]

    Akrami, F

    Y. Akrami, F. Arroja, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, M. Ballardini, A. J. Banday, R. Barreiro, N. Bartolo, S. Basak,et al., Astronomy & Astrophysics641, A10 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Calabrese, J

    E. Calabrese, J. C. Hill, H. T. Jense, A. La Posta, I. Abril-Cabezas, G. E. Addison, P. A. Ade, S. Aiola, T. Alford, D. Alonso, M. Amiri, R. An, Z. Atkins, J. E. Austermann, E. Barbavara, N. Barbieri, N. Battaglia, E. S. Battistelli, J. A. Beall, R. Bean, A. Beheshti, B. Beringue, T. Bhandarkar, E. Biermann, B. Bolliet, J. R. Bond, V. Capalbo, F. Carrero,...

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Wands, N

    D. Wands, N. Bartolo, S. Matarrese, and A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. D66, 043520 (2002)

    work page 2002

  10. [10]

    Bartolo, S

    N. Bartolo, S. Matarrese, and A. Riotto, Phys. Rev. D64, 123504 (2001)

    work page 2001

  11. [11]

    Huston and A

    I. Huston and A. J. Christopherson, Phys. Rev. D85, 063507 (2012)

    work page 2012

  12. [12]

    Di Marco, F

    F. Di Marco, F. Finelli, and R. Brandenberger, Phys. Rev. D67, 063512 (2003)

    work page 2003

  13. [13]

    Mukhanov and P

    V. Mukhanov and P. J. Steinhardt, Physics Letters B422, 52 (1998)

    work page 1998

  14. [14]

    Lalak, D

    Z. Lalak, D. Langlois, S. Pokorski, and K. Turzy´ nski, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2007, 014 (2007)

    work page 2007

  15. [15]

    A. A. Starobinsky, S. Tsujikawa, and J. Yokoyama, Nuclear Physics B610, 383 (2001)

    work page 2001

  16. [16]

    Langlois, Phys

    D. Langlois, Phys. Rev. D59, 123512 (1999)

    work page 1999

  17. [17]

    Langlois, Comptes Rendus Physique4, 953 (2003), dossier: The Cosmic Microwave Back- ground

    D. Langlois, Comptes Rendus Physique4, 953 (2003), dossier: The Cosmic Microwave Back- ground

    work page 2003

  18. [18]

    Garcia-Saenz, L

    S. Garcia-Saenz, L. Pinol, and S. Renaux-Petel, Journal of High Energy Physics2020(2020), 10.1007/jhep01(2020)073

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2020)073 2020

  19. [19]

    Chen and Y

    X. Chen and Y. Wang, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2010, 027–027 (2010)

    work page 2010

  20. [20]

    Battefeld and R

    T. Battefeld and R. Easther, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2007, 020–020 (2007)

    work page 2007

  21. [21]

    Bernardeau and J.-P

    F. Bernardeau and J.-P. Uzan, Physical Review D66(2002), 10.1103/physrevd.66.103506

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.66.103506 2002

  22. [22]

    Iarygina, M

    O. Iarygina, M. D. Marsh, and G. Salinas, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2024, 014 (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    D. I. Kaiser, E. A. Mazenc, and E. I. Sfakianakis, Phys. Rev. D87, 064004 (2013)

    work page 2013

  24. [24]

    Elliston, D

    J. Elliston, D. Seery, and R. Tavakol, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2012, 060–060 (2012)

    work page 2012

  25. [25]

    Schutz, E

    K. Schutz, E. I. Sfakianakis, and D. I. Kaiser, Phys. Rev. D89, 064044 (2014)

    work page 2014

  26. [27]

    D. I. Kaiser and A. T. Todhunter, Phys. Rev. D81, 124037 (2010)

    work page 2010

  27. [28]

    Braglia, D

    M. Braglia, D. K. Hazra, F. Finelli, G. F. Smoot, L. Sriramkumar, and A. A. Starobinsky, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2020, 001–001 (2020)

    work page 2020

  28. [29]

    Di Marco and F

    F. Di Marco and F. Finelli, Physical Review D71(2005), 10.1103/physrevd.71.123502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.71.123502 2005

  29. [30]

    Ach´ ucarro, J.-O

    A. Ach´ ucarro, J.-O. Gong, S. Hardeman, G. A. Palma, and S. P. Patil, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2011, 030 (2011)

    work page 2011

  30. [31]

    C´ espedes, V

    S. C´ espedes, V. Atal, and G. A. Palma, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2012, 008 (2012)

    work page 2012

  31. [32]

    X. Gao, D. Langlois, and S. Mizuno, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2012, 040–040 (2012)

    work page 2012

  32. [33]

    Ema, Physics Letters B770, 403 (2017)

    Y. Ema, Physics Letters B770, 403 (2017)

    work page 2017

  33. [34]

    M. He, A. A. Starobinsky, and J. Yokoyama, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2018, 064–064 (2018)

    work page 2018

  34. [35]

    Wang and T

    Y.-C. Wang and T. Wang, Phys. Rev. D96, 123506 (2017)

    work page 2017

  35. [36]

    Gundhi and C

    A. Gundhi and C. F. Steinwachs, Nuclear Physics B954, 114989 (2020)

    work page 2020

  36. [37]

    Bezrukov and M

    F. Bezrukov and M. Shaposhnikov, Physics Letters B659, 703 (2008)

    work page 2008

  37. [38]

    Salvio and A

    A. Salvio and A. Mazumdar, Physics Letters B750, 194 (2015)

    work page 2015

  38. [39]

    Gorbunov and A

    D. Gorbunov and A. Tokareva, Physics Letters B788, 37 (2019)

    work page 2019

  39. [40]

    Bezrukov, D

    F. Bezrukov, D. Gorbunov, C. Shepherd, and A. Tokareva, Physics Letters B795, 657 (2019)

    work page 2019

  40. [41]

    Understanding gravitationally induced decoherence parameters in neu- trino oscillations using a microscopic quantum mechan- ical model,

    M. He, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2021(2021), 10.1088/1475- 7516/2021/05/021, arXiv:2010.11717

    work page doi:10.1088/1475- 2021

  41. [42]

    M. He, R. Jinno, K. Kamada, S. C. Park, A. A. Starobinsky, and J. Yokoyama, Physics Letters, Section B: Nuclear, Elementary Particle and High-Energy Physics791, 36 (2019), arXiv:1812.10099

    work page arXiv 2019

  42. [43]

    M. He, R. Jinno, K. Kamada, A. A. Starobinsky, and J. Yokoyama, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2021, 20 (2021), arXiv:2007.10369

    work page arXiv 2021

  43. [44]

    Pineda and L

    F. Pineda and L. O. Pimentel, The European Physical Journal C85, 731 (2025)

    work page 2025

  44. [45]

    Bueno, P

    R. Durrer, O. Sobol, and S. Vilchinskii, Physical Review D106(2022), 10.1103/phys- revd.106.123520

    work page doi:10.1103/phys- 2022

  45. [46]

    Ema and S

    Y. Ema and S. Verner, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2024, 039 (2024). 32

    work page 2024

  46. [47]

    J. Kim, Z. Yang, and Y.-l. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D112, 043534 (2025), arXiv:2503.16907 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [48]

    D. Y. Cheong, S. M. Lee, and S. C. Park, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2021, 032 (2021)

    work page 2021

  48. [49]

    D. Y. Cheong, K. Kohri, and S. C. Park, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2022, 015 (2022)

    work page 2022

  49. [50]

    Modak, Phys

    T. Modak, Phys. Rev. D112, 115006 (2025)

    work page 2025

  50. [51]

    J. L. F. Barb´ on and J. R. Espinosa, Physical Review D79(2009), 10.1103/physrevd.79.081302

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.081302 2009

  51. [52]

    Burgess, H

    C. Burgess, H. M. Lee, and M. Trott, Journal of High Energy Physics2009, 103–103 (2009)

    work page 2009

  52. [53]

    D. I. Kaiser, Physical Review D81(2010), 10.1103/physrevd.81.084044

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.81.084044 2010

  53. [54]

    A. J. Tolley and M. Wyman, Physical Review D81(2010), 10.1103/physrevd.81.043502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.81.043502 2010

  54. [55]

    Cremonini, Z

    S. Cremonini, Z. Lalak, and K. Turzy´ nski, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2011, 016–016 (2011)

    work page 2011

  55. [56]

    Gong and T

    J.-O. Gong and T. Tanaka, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2011, 015 (2011)

    work page 2011

  56. [57]

    Gong, International Journal of Modern Physics D26, 1740003 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1142/S021827181740003X

    J.-O. Gong, International Journal of Modern Physics D26, 1740003 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1142/S021827181740003X

    work page doi:10.1142/s021827181740003x 2017

  57. [58]

    Karamitsos and A

    S. Karamitsos and A. Pilaftsis, Nuclear Physics B927, 219 (2018)

    work page 2018

  58. [59]

    Fumagalli, S

    J. Fumagalli, S. Renaux-Petel, and L. T. Witkowski, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2021, 030 (2021)

    work page 2021

  59. [60]

    S. S. Mishra and V. Sahni, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2020, 007–007 (2020)

    work page 2020

  60. [61]

    Arnowitt, S

    R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner, General Relativity and Gravitation40, 1997–2027 (2008)

    work page 1997

  61. [62]

    Maldacena, Journal of High Energy Physics2003, 013–013 (2003)

    J. Maldacena, Journal of High Energy Physics2003, 013–013 (2003)

    work page 2003

  62. [63]

    Langlois and S

    D. Langlois and S. Renaux-Petel, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2008, 017 (2008)

    work page 2008

  63. [64]

    Sasaki and E

    M. Sasaki and E. D. Stewart, Progress of Theoretical Physics95, 71 (1996), https://academic.oup.com/ptp/article-pdf/95/1/71/5377016/95-1-71.pdf

    work page 1996

  64. [65]

    Gordon, D

    C. Gordon, D. Wands, B. A. Bassett, and R. Maartens, Phys. Rev. D63, 023506 (2000)

    work page 2000

  65. [66]

    Seery and J

    D. Seery and J. E. Lidsey, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2005, 003–003 (2005). 33

    work page 2005

  66. [67]

    D. H. Lyth, K. A. Malik, and M. Sasaki, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2005, 004 (2005)

    work page 2005

  67. [68]

    D. H. Lyth and Y. Rodr´ ıguez, Physical Review D71(2005), 10.1103/physrevd.71.123508

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.71.123508 2005

  68. [69]

    Mukhanov, H

    V. Mukhanov, H. Feldman, and R. Brandenberger, Physics Reports215, 203 (1992)

    work page 1992

  69. [70]

    Chen and Y

    X. Chen and Y. Wang, Phys. Rev. D81, 063511 (2010)

    work page 2010

  70. [71]

    The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) I: Overview

    J. Lesgourgues, (2011), arXiv:1104.2932 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  71. [72]

    The public code can be found in the repositoryhttps://github.com/lesgourg/class_ public.git

    work page

  72. [73]

    P. Ade, Z. Ahmed, M. Amiri, D. Barkats, R. B. Thakur, C. Bischoff, D. Beck, J. Bock, H. Boenish, E. Bullock, V. Buza, J. Cheshire, J. Connors, J. Cornelison, M. Crumrine, A. Cukierman, E. Denison, M. Dierickx, L. Duband, M. Eiben, S. Fatigoni, J. Filippini, S. Fliescher, N. Goeckner-Wald, D. Goldfinger, J. Grayson, P. Grimes, G. Hall, G. Halal, M. Halpern...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.151301 2021

  73. [74]

    Louis, A

    T. Louis, A. La Posta, Z. Atkins, H. T. Jense, others, and The Atacama Cosmology Telescope collaboration, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2025, 062 (2025)

    work page 2025

  74. [75]

    R. K. Jain, P. Chingangbam, J.-O. Gong, L. Sriramkumar, and T. Souradeep, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2009, 009–009 (2009). 34

    work page 2009