Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

This paper claims that the induced gravitational wave background is suppressed once correlations between third-order induced gravitational waves and primordial tensor modes are included, because the relevant source terms subtract from the s

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 ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 21:39 UTC pith:GKZVBH3Y

load-bearing objection Careful all-scales computation of third-order iGW source terms; the narrow-peak suppression is plausible, but the broad-peak claim rests on a gauge-dependent divergence and a dropped positive correlator. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.07811 v1 pith:GKZVBH3Y submitted 2025-09-09 astro-ph.CO gr-qc

Suppression of the induced gravitational wave background due to third-order perturbations

Raphael Picard , Luis E. Padilla , Karim A. Malik , David J. Mulryne This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO gr-qc PACS 98.80.-k04.30.-w
keywords induced gravitational wavesthird-order cosmological perturbation theorystochastic gravitational wave backgroundscalar-tensor induced gravitational wavesspectral densityradiation-dominated universeUV divergencesprimordial tensor modes
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 argues that the stochastic gravitational wave background is incomplete without the cross-correlation of third-order induced gravitational waves with primordial tensor modes, a term entering at the same perturbative order as the familiar second-order scalar-induced and scalar-tensor-induced waves. Working in third-order cosmological perturbation theory in a radiation-dominated universe, the authors compute all four source terms of this correlation and find they subtract from the spectral density, suppressing the induced background at peak scales rather than adding to it. For broad input power spectra the suppression grows and some integrands diverge in the ultraviolet, mirroring but not cancelling the known divergent behaviour of second-order scalar-tensor waves. For the widest peaks considered, the total spectral density turns negative, which the authors attribute to the neglected auto-correlation of third-order tensor modes and to divergent kernels. A complete prediction at this order, they argue, must include these terms and ultimately the missing positive auto-correlation.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the cross-correlation of third-order induced tensor modes with primordial tensor modes, ⟨h(1)h(3)⟩, enters the gravitational wave background at the same perturbative order as the standard second-order terms and subtracts from the spectral density. The authors derive the four source terms producing it, solve the third-order tensor equation with Green's functions, and compute the time-averaged spectral density in a radiation-dominated universe with log-normal peaked input spectra. The combined effect suppresses the spectral density at peak scales, deepening as the peak widens, and some integrands diverge in the ultraviolet without cancelling the known scalar-t

What carries the argument

The central object is the equal-time cross-correlation power spectrum P^(13)_λ(η,k), defined by ⟨h^(1)_k,λ h^(3)_k′,λ′⟩ = δ_λλ′ δ(k+k′) (2π²/k³) P^(13)_λ(η,k), which enters the spectral density Ω(η,k) on the same footing as the second-order auto-correlation P^(22). The computation runs through third-order cosmological perturbation theory in the conformal Newtonian gauge: the third-order tensor equation is sourced by four terms (quadratic scalars times a first-order tensor; second-order scalars, vectors, and tensors each multiplied by first-order scalars), each second-order quantity being itself sourced by first-order scalar-tensor products. Solutions use Green's functions, producing nested t

Load-bearing premise

The central claim leans on leaving out the h(3)h(3) auto-correlation: the authors say that term would add a positive contribution and could turn the observable positive, which would leave the net suppression dependent on a truncation choice.

What would settle it

Compute the power spectrum P^(33) of the third-order auto-correlation ⟨h(3)h(3)⟩ at the same order and add it to the spectral density of Fig. 8: if the total at σ = 1 remains negative (or the dip persists), the suppression is robust; if the added positive term cancels the negative valleys, the reported suppression is an artefact of the omitted term. A second decisive check is repeating the kernel computation in a different gauge: the UV divergences and the sign of P^(13) either persist, supporting the Newtonian-gauge result, or vanish, showing the divergences were gauge artefacts.

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

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Predictions of the induced gravitational wave background that stop at second order overestimate the spectral density at peak scales once the ⟨h(1)h(3)⟩ correlations are included.
  • The ultraviolet divergence of the second-order scalar-tensor contribution is not cancelled by the new terms; several of the new integrands diverge as well, so the known 'unphysical enhancement' persists at this order.
  • Because the tensor power spectrum factorizes outside the integrand, these third-order terms do not distinguish right- from left-handed polarizations; chiral signatures in the primordial tensor spectrum do not leak into this contribution.
  • For wide input peaks (σ ≳ 0.5) the total spectral density becomes negative; the authors regard only the narrow-peak case (σ = 0.1) as realistic and argue that the missing h(3)h(3) auto-correlation, a positive term, is needed to complete the prediction.
  • The scale and depth of the suppression track the width of the input power spectrum, so constraints on peaked scalar spectra (e.g., from primordial-black-hole scenarios) shift with the assumed peak width.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A decisive follow-up is computing the h(3)h(3) auto-correlation at the same order: the authors note it would add a positive contribution, so the test is whether it lifts the negative valleys of their total spectral density without erasing the suppression—if it does, the suppression claim stands; if it overwhelms the dip, part of the reported effect is a truncation artefact.
  • The gauge caveat the authors raise suggests a robustness check: recomputing the UV-divergent kernels in a different gauge. If the divergences vanish there, the conformal Newtonian gauge result—and with it the strength of the suppression—would need revision.
  • Because the new terms suppress the background near the peak of the scalar spectrum, forecasts for LISA-band scalar-induced signals (for instance from primordial black hole formation) would be pushed to lower amplitudes; matched-filter searches would need templates that include a negative cross-correlation term.

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 / 5 minor

Summary. This paper computes contributions to the stochastic gravitational wave background (SGWB) from equal-time correlators between primordial tensor perturbations h^(1) and third-order induced tensor perturbations h^(3), in the conformal Newtonian gauge and in a radiation-dominated universe. The authors identify four source terms: linear scalar-scalar-tensor, second-order scalar coupled to first-order scalar, second-order vector coupled to first-order scalar, and second-order tensor coupled to first-order scalar. They obtain expressions for the corresponding power spectra valid for general constant equation-of-state parameter w, then specialize to w=1/3, evaluate the kernels analytically where possible and numerically otherwise, and present spectral densities for log-normal input spectra peaked in the LISA band with widths σ=0.1, 0.5, 1. The central finding is that the new h^(1)h^(3) correlations are negative at the relevant scales and suppress the total spectral density; for σ=0.5 and 1 the computed total becomes negative. The paper explicitly cautions that σ>0.1 should not be regarded as realistic, and it flags in footnote 7 that the UV divergences on which the strong-σ behaviour rests have not been checked for gauge invariance.

Significance. If the central suppression result is correct, it is an important contribution to the induced-GW literature: it shows that h^(1)h^(3) correlations act at the same perturbative order as scalar-tensor iGWs and can substantially modify the predicted spectrum, with consequences for LISA forecasts and primordial-black-hole interpretations. The derivation is systematic and largely transparent: the source terms are enumerated, expressions are given for general w, analytical radiation-dominated kernels are provided where possible, and the analytical and numerical parts of each contribution are clearly separated. The paper is also unusually candid about the limits of the calculation: footnote 7 admits that the divergences may be gauge artifacts, the text repeatedly states where behaviour is inferred from mesh plots rather than derived, and no parameters are fitted to the output. These strengths make the paper worth serious consideration; the remaining issues are load-bearing rather than cosmetic.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.2 and footnote 7] The gauge-dependence caveat is load-bearing. The strong-σ suppression and the negative total spectral density are driven by the UV limits v→1, u→0 and v→0, u→1. Footnote 7 states that if these divergences do not occur in another gauge, 'the gauge we are using [is] not suitable for this computation.' This is not a peripheral remark: for σ=0.5 and 1, the claimed suppression is precisely the divergent behaviour in these limits. Since no gauge-invariance test is provided, the central claim that third-order perturbations suppress the background at broad peaks is not established. Please repeat the P^(13) computation in a second gauge (e.g. synchronous or flat gauge), or demonstrate that the divergent limits correspond to a gauge-invariant quantity, for example by constructing a third-order gauge-invariant tensor variable.
  2. [§6 and Fig. 8] The total spectral density shown in Fig. 8 is negative for σ=0.5 and 1. The authors themselves call negative values 'unphysical' and attribute them in part to the omitted auto-correlation of third-order tensor modes, which 'would add a positive contribution and could potentially make the overall observable positive.' However, the abstract and introduction state the suppression result without this qualification. If the h^(3)h^(3) term is genuinely higher order, then the negative sum should be presented as a partial correlation rather than as 'the' spectral density; if it is needed for a positive observable, its omission must be justified at the order of the calculation. Please either include this term or explicitly restrict the central claim to the range of σ where the presented quantity is non-negative.
  3. [§5.2 and Figs. 10–12] Several of the quantitative conclusions are inferred from mesh plots rather than derived. For the second-order-scalar contribution the text states 'we are therefore unable to conclude that the contribution which involves second-order scalars diverges'; for the vector contribution the divergence is 'concluded from mesh plots'; and for the tensor contribution the plot 'seems similar in magnitude' but 'it is not possible to conclude whether this is also as u^-4.' Since these numerical terms dominate the suppression for large σ, the claim that 'some terms diverge in the UV' is only as strong as the visual inspection of log|integrand| plots. Please provide analytic asymptotics for the nested kernels in the relevant corners of the (v,u) domain, or at least a quantitative numerical convergence study (e.g. Richardson extrapolation along v→1, u→0 and v→0, u→1) so that the plotted behaviour is bac
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.2] Typo: 'We empahsize' should read 'We emphasize'.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] The phrase 'Regardless, of the value of σ' contains an errant comma; also the sentence 'we would expect the higher order contributions to converge' is unclear—presumably 'to be subdominant' or 'to converge to a finite total' is meant.
  3. [§5.1, footnote 4] The statement that the numerical code was tested by comparing to known analytical kernels for SIGWs and scalar-tensor iGWs would be more useful with a quantified agreement (e.g. relative error over the plotted frequency range).
  4. [§5.2, parity paragraph] The sentence 'making the dependence on the parity of the initial spectrum trivial' is awkward and could be misread. It would be clearer to say that, unlike scalar-tensor iGWs, the third-order contributions are identical for right- and left-handed polarisations and therefore do not probe a chiral primordial tensor background.
  5. [§2.1, Eq. (2.12)] The delta function δ(q+p−q) is notationally confusing; it is equal to δ(p), which is presumably the intended statement that the correlation forces p=0. Writing δ(p) explicitly would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the third-order iGW computation is self-contained and the cited prior results are independent inputs, not restatements of the claimed suppression.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that correlations of third-order induced GWs with primordial tensors suppress the spectral density—is obtained by a direct perturbative calculation: it solves the third-order tensor equation (Eq. 2.9), correlates the solution with linear tensors (Eq. 2.6), computes each power-spectrum contribution (Eqs. 4.15, 4.23, 4.34, 4.43), and then evaluates the spectral density using fixed log-normal input spectra (Eq. 5.17). No parameter is fitted to the output, and no output quantity is used to define an input; the amplitudes and widths are stated inputs from the prior peak convention. The paper uses earlier scalar-tensor iGW results, including the authors' own Ref. [30], but those are independent prior calculations of second-order effects and are not consequences of the present claim. The gauge caveat in footnote 7 is a robustness/uniqueness limitation, not a circularity: the authors explicitly flag that a different gauge might change the divergence, which is a correctness risk, not a reduction of the result to its inputs. Similarly, the acknowledged omission of h^(3)h^(3) autocorrelations (Sec. 5.2 and Conclusion) is an incompleteness explicitly stated by the authors, and it does not make the h^(1)h^(3) computation self-referential. The negative spectral densities are presented as a consequence of the computed correlators and are flagged as unphysical, with the authors noting the omitted positive term. No step in the derivation chain exhibits a fitted input renamed as a prediction, an ansatz smuggled in via citation, or a uniqueness theorem imported from the authors' own prior work. Accordingly, the correct circularity finding is a non-finding: the derivation is self-contained against the stated perturbative framework, and the load-bearing caveats are physical-robustness concerns rather than circular reasoning.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The computations rest on standard perturbation theory and the specified fluid model. The log-normal spectrum parameters are external inputs. No new physical entities are introduced. The main ad hoc assumptions are the omission of the h^(3)h^(3) correlation and the physicality of the conformal Newtonian gauge divergence.

free parameters (4)
  • A_R = ~2e-2
    Amplitude of the log-normal primordial scalar power spectrum (Eq. 5.17), set to A_R = 10 A_h ~ 2e-2; an input choice, not fit to the output.
  • A_h = ~2e-3
    Amplitude of the log-normal primordial tensor power spectrum, set to one tenth of A_R; input choice.
  • k_peak (f_peak) = 3.4 mHz
    Peak scale in the LISA band, chosen in continuation of Ref. [30]; input choice.
  • sigma = 0.1, 0.5, 1.0
    Width of the log-normal primordial peaks; the paper declares only sigma=0.1 realistic. The suppression behavior with sigma is a central numerical result.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption First-order perturbations are Gaussian, so odd correlators vanish and four-point functions factor into two-point products
    Used in Sec. 2 and Sec. 4.1 to reduce h h R R correlators to disconnected pieces; connected primordial non-Gaussianity is neglected.
  • domain assumption No anisotropic stress at any order, so Phi^(1)=Psi^(1)
    Sec. 2; simplifies the first-order transfer functions.
  • domain assumption Adiabatic barotropic perfect fluid with constant equation of state w
    Sec. 2; the universe content is modeled as a single fluid.
  • domain assumption Radiation-dominated universe, w=1/3, for all numerical results
    Sec. 5; the spectral densities are computed in RD.
  • domain assumption First-order vector perturbations are diluted during inflation and neglected
    Sec. 2; only second-order vectors sourced by scalar-tensor mixing are kept.
  • ad hoc to paper The auto-correlation h^(3)h^(3) is not included and is assumed not to change the sign of the physical spectrum
    Sec. 6; the authors state it would add positive contributions and could make the observable positive.
  • ad hoc to paper The UV-divergent behavior in the conformal Newtonian gauge is physical
    Footnote 7; the authors note the divergence may not occur in another gauge, which would invalidate the use of this gauge.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 43633 in / 10046 out tokens · 99090 ms · 2026-08-04T21:39:36.885260+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Suppression of the induced gravitational wave background due to third-order perturbations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GKZVBH3Y

@misc{pith2026250907811,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Suppression of the induced gravitational wave background due to third-order perturbations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GKZVBH3Y}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07811}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

In this work, we revisit and evaluate new source terms which contribute to the induced gravitational wave background. We study their respective contributions to the stochastic gravitational wave background by computing their spectral densities in a radiation-dominated universe. These terms appear at third order in cosmological perturbation theory, however, their correlations with primordial gravitational waves are non-trivial and appear at the same order as so-called scalar induced and scalar-tensor induced gravitational waves. We find that these gravitational wave sources suppress the spectral density at the scales we consider. Furthermore, similarly to scalar-tensor source terms at second order, we find that some terms are enhanced when the input primordial power spectrum of scalar fluctuations is not sufficiently peaked. Hence, where possible, we show that under certain limits the integrands of these terms diverge in the UV sector.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Observable Gravitational Wave Strain at Second Order

    gr-qc 2025-12 conditional novelty 7.0

    At second order, the gravitational-wave strain measured by geodesic observers exchanging light pulses is the transverse-traceless metric perturbation in the Newton gauge (h_N^(2)).

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 8 internal anchors

  1. [5]

    Xu et al.,Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I,Res

    H. Xu et al.,Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I,Res. Astron. Astrophys.23(2023) 075024 [2306.16216]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  2. [6]

    D. J. Reardon et al.,Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,Astrophys. J. Lett.951(2023) L6 [2306.16215]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  3. [7]

    Zic et al.,The Parkes Pulsar Timing Array third data release,Publ

    A. Zic et al.,The Parkes Pulsar Timing Array third data release,Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral. 40(2023) e049 [2306.16230]. [8]NANOGra vcollaboration,The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Search for Signals from New Physics,Astrophys. J. Lett.951(2023) L11 [2306.16219]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  4. [9]

    Bartolo et al.,Science with the space-based interferometer LISA

    N. Bartolo et al.,Science with the space-based interferometer LISA. IV: Probing inflation with gravitational waves,JCAP12(2016) 026 [1610.06481]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  5. [10]

    Tomita,Non-Linear Theory of Gravitational Instability in the Expanding Universe,Prog

    K. Tomita,Non-Linear Theory of Gravitational Instability in the Expanding Universe,Prog. Theor. Phys.37(1967) 831

    1967

  6. [11]

    Matarrese, O

    S. Matarrese, O. Pantano and D. Saez,A General relativistic approach to the nonlinear evolution of collisionless matter,Phys. Rev. D47(1993) 1311

    1993

  7. [12]

    Matarrese, O

    S. Matarrese, O. Pantano and D. Saez,General relativistic dynamics of irrotational dust: Cosmological implications,Phys. Rev. Lett.72(1994) 320 [astro-ph/9310036]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  8. [13]

    Matarrese, S

    S. Matarrese, S. Mollerach and M. Bruni,Second order perturbations of the Einstein-de Sitter universe,Phys. Rev. D58(1998) 043504 [astro-ph/9707278]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  9. [14]

    K. N. Ananda, C. Clarkson and D. Wands,The Cosmological gravitational wave background from primordial density perturbations,Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 123518 [gr-qc/0612013]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  10. [15]

    Baumann, P

    D. Baumann, P. J. Steinhardt, K. Takahashi and K. Ichiki,Gravitational Wave Spectrum Induced by Primordial Scalar Perturbations,Phys. Rev. D76(2007) 084019 [hep-th/0703290]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  11. [16]

    L. E. Padilla, J. C. Hidalgo, K. A. Malik and D. Mulryne,Detecting the stochastic gravitational wave background from primordial black holes in slow-reheating scenarios,JCAP12(2024) 011 [2405.19271]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  12. [17]

    Inomata, K

    K. Inomata, K. Kohri and T. Terada,Detected stochastic gravitational waves and subsolar-mass primordial black holes,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 063506 [2306.17834]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  13. [18]

    Clesse, J

    S. Clesse, J. García-Bellido and S. Orani,Detecting the Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background from Primordial Black Hole Formation,1812.11011

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  14. [19]

    Nakama, J

    T. Nakama, J. Silk and M. Kamionkowski,Stochastic gravitational waves associated with the formation of primordial black holes,Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 043511

    work page 2017

  15. [20]

    Nakama,Stochastic gravitational waves associated with primordial black holes formed during an early matter era,Phys

    T. Nakama,Stochastic gravitational waves associated with primordial black holes formed during an early matter era,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 063519. – 50 –

    work page 2020

  16. [21]

    Vaskonen and H

    V. Vaskonen and H. Veermäe,Did NANOGrav see a signal from primordial black hole formation?,Phys. Rev. Lett.126(2021) 051303 [2009.07832]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  17. [22]

    De Luca, G

    V. De Luca, G. Franciolini and A. Riotto,NANOGrav Data Hints at Primordial Black Holes as Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.126(2021) 041303 [2009.08268]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  18. [23]

    Yuan and Q.-G

    C. Yuan and Q.-G. Huang,A topic review on probing primordial black hole dark matter with scalar induced gravitational waves,iScience24(2021) 102860 [2103.04739]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  19. [24]

    Domènech,Scalar Induced Gravitational Waves Review,Universe7(2021) 398 [2109.01398]

    G. Domènech,Scalar Induced Gravitational Waves Review,Universe7(2021) 398 [2109.01398]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  20. [25]

    Barnaby, E

    N. Barnaby, E. Pajer and M. Peloso,Gauge Field Production in Axion Inflation: Consequences for Monodromy, non-Gaussianity in the CMB, and Gravitational Waves at Interferometers, Phys. Rev. D85(2012) 023525 [1110.3327]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  21. [26]

    Thorne, T

    B. Thorne, T. Fujita, M. Hazumi, N. Katayama, E. Komatsu and M. Shiraishi,Finding the chiral gravitational wave background of an axion-SU(2) inflationary model using CMB observations and laser interferometers,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 043506 [1707.03240]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  22. [27]

    Dimastrogiovanni, M

    E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello and T. Fujita,Primordial Gravitational Waves from Axion-Gauge Fields Dynamics,JCAP01(2017) 019 [1608.04216]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  23. [28]

    Gravitational waves from primordial scalar and tensor perturbations

    Z. Chang, X. Zhang and J. Z. Zhou,Gravitational waves from primordial scalar and tensor perturbations,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 063510 [2209.07693]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  24. [29]

    P. Bari, N. Bartolo, G. Domènech and S. Matarrese,Gravitational waves induced by scalar-tensor mixing,2307.05404

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  25. [30]

    Picard and K

    R. Picard and K. A. Malik,Induced gravitational waves: the effect of first order tensor perturbations,JCAP10(2024) 010 [2311.14513]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  26. [31]

    Y. H. Yu and S. Wang,Primordial gravitational waves assisted by cosmological scalar perturbations,2303.03897

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  27. [32]

    C. Chen, A. Ota, H. Y. Zhu and Y. Zhu,Missing one-loop contributions in secondary gravitational waves,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 083518 [2210.17176]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [33]

    K. A. Malik and D. Wands,Cosmological perturbations,Phys. Rept.475(2009) 1 [0809.4944]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  29. [34]

    A. J. Christopherson and K. A. Malik,Practical tools for third order cosmological perturbations,JCAP11(2009) 012 [0909.0942]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  30. [35]

    Caprini and D

    C. Caprini and D. G. Figueroa,Cosmological Backgrounds of Gravitational Waves,Class. Quant. Grav.35(2018) 163001 [1801.04268]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  31. [36]

    J. Z. Zhou, X. Zhang, Q. H. Zhu and Z. Chang,The third order scalar induced gravitational waves,JCAP05(2022) 013 [2106.01641]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  32. [37]

    J. R. Espinosa, D. Racco and A. Riotto,A Cosmological Signature of the SM Higgs Instability: Gravitational Waves,JCAP09(2018) 012 [1804.07732]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  33. [38]

    Lectures on Gravitational Wave Signatures of Primordial Black Holes

    G. Domènech,Lectures on Gravitational Wave Signatures of Primordial Black Holes, 7, 2023, 2307.06964

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  34. [39]

    G. P. Lepage,Adaptive multidimensional integration: VEGAS enhanced,J. Comput. Phys.439 (2021) 110386 [2009.05112]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  35. [40]

    C. J. Moore, R. H. Cole and C. P. L. Berry,Gravitational-wave sensitivity curves,Class. Quant. Grav.32(2015) 015014 [1408.0740]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  36. [41]

    B. S. Sathyaprakash and B. F. Schutz,Physics, Astrophysics and Cosmology with Gravitational Waves,Living Rev. Rel.12(2009) 2 [0903.0338]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  37. [42]

    Obata and J

    I. Obata and J. Soda,Chiral primordial Chiral primordial gravitational waves from dilaton induced delayed chromonatural inflation,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 123502 [1602.06024]. – 51 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  38. [43]

    Bartolo and G

    N. Bartolo and G. Orlando,Parity breaking signatures from a Chern-Simons coupling during inflation: the case of non-Gaussian gravitational waves,JCAP07(2017) 034 [1706.04627]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  39. [44]

    Bartolo, G

    N. Bartolo, G. Orlando and M. Shiraishi,Measuring chiral gravitational waves in Chern-Simons gravity with CMB bispectra,JCAP01(2019) 050 [1809.11170]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  40. [45]

    Picard and M

    R. Picard and M. W. Davies,Effects of scalar non-Gaussianity on induced scalar-tensor gravitational waves,JCAP02(2025) 037 [2410.17819]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  41. [46]

    T. King, S. Butcher and L. Zalewski,Apocrita - High Performance Computing Cluster for Queen Mary University of London, Mar., 2017. 10.5281/zenodo.438045

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.438045 2017

  42. [47]

    Pitrou, X

    C. Pitrou, X. Roy and O. Umeh,xpand: An algorithm for perturbing homogeneous cosmologies, Class. Quant. Grav.30(2013) 165002 [1302.6174]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  43. [48]

    Vector and tensor contributions to the curvature perturbation at second order

    P. Carrilho and K. A. Malik,Vector and tensor contributions to the curvature perturbation at second order,JCAP02(2016) 021 [1507.06922]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  44. [49]

    T. H. C. Lu, K. Ananda and C. Clarkson,Vector modes generated by primordial density fluctuations,Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 043523 [0709.1619]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  45. [50]

    Kohri and T

    K. Kohri and T. Terada,Semianalytic calculation of gravitational wave spectrum nonlinearly induced from primordial curvature perturbations,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 123532 [1804.08577]. – 52 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018