Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

An infinite tower of particles whose mass drops exponentially as the inflaton rolls, as required by the Swampland Distance Conjecture, shifts inflationary observables only by factors of (H/Λsp)^(2+p), so standard single-field predictions su

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

2026-08-03 17:49 UTC pith:J6WBZOWQ

load-bearing objection A solid, self-screening scaling law for SDC-type towers — (H/Λsp)^{2+p} suppression holds for the scalar model as defined, but the string-embedding story leans on an unproven Higuchi evasion that the paper itself flags. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2512.07930 v2 pith:J6WBZOWQ submitted 2025-12-08 hep-th astro-ph.CO

Inflationary Particle Production and the Swampland

Dieter L\"ust , Joaquin Masias , Mauro Pieroni , Marco Scalisi This is my paper
classification hep-th astro-ph.CO
keywords inflationary particle productionswampland distance conjecturespecies scaletower of light statescosmic microwave backgroundscalar spectral indextensor-to-scalar rationon-Gaussianity
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 asks whether the infinite tower of light particles that the Swampland Distance Conjecture places along any super-Planckian field excursion can change what inflation predicts for the cosmic microwave background. It shows that particle production from such a tower corrects the scalar spectral index, the tensor-to-scalar ratio, and the non-Gaussianity parameter by a universal factor (H/Λsp)^(2+p), where H is the Hubble scale, Λsp is the quantum-gravity cutoff, and p ≥ 1 measures how densely the tower is packed. Because this factor is tiny whenever H is comfortably below Λsp, the tower's presence leaves inflationary phenomenology essentially unchanged in the regime where a weakly coupled gravitational effective field theory is valid. The corrections only become noticeable as H approaches Λsp, exactly the point at which the effective description is expected to break down anyway.

Core claim

For a tower of scalar modes with masses mn = n^(1/p) m1 e^(−γφ) coupled to the inflaton through their mass term, the sourced contributions to the scalar power spectrum, tensor power spectrum, and equilateral bispectrum all scale as (H/Λsp)^(2+p). For the physically simplest case p = 1, this means corrections scale as (H/Λsp)^3. Since the species scale Λsp acts as the quantum-gravity cutoff and consistency requires H ≪ Λsp, the tower-induced corrections are parametrically suppressed relative to the standard single-field predictions. The authors verify this by explicit computation of the two- and three-point functions, and they demonstrate for several representative potentials—power-law, monom

What carries the argument

The central object is an infinite tower of scalar fields with an exponentially field-dependent mass, mt = m1 e^(−γφ), whose density is parameterized by p through mn = n^(1/p) mt. The ratio δn = m_n^2 e^(−2γφ)/H^2 controls the mode dynamics: modes with δn < 9/4 are 'light' and get enhanced, while heavier modes are exponentially suppressed. Summing the light-mode contributions and recasting the result in terms of the species scale Λsp = M_P^(2/3) mt^(1/3) yields the universal (H/Λsp)^(2+p) scaling for all inflationary observables. The species scale thus plays a double role: it sets the ultraviolet cutoff and simultaneously bounds how strongly the tower can affect infrared cosmological observab

Load-bearing premise

The claimed suppression assumes that many tower modes—at least about ten—are lighter than the Hubble scale, so the sum over modes can be treated as a smooth large-number limit; if only a few modes are light, the derivation of the (H/Λsp)^(2+p) scaling is not established.

What would settle it

Numerically solve the mode equation for a tower with only NH = 1, 2, or 3 light modes (for example, taking mt/H of order one) and compute the sourced power spectrum exactly; if the correction to ns or r fails to track (H/Λsp)^(2+p) or becomes comparable to the single-field contribution, the paper's universal suppression is not general. Conversely, a future CMB measurement finding a deviation from single-field predictions at H/Λsp well below 0.1 would contradict the claimed robustness.

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

If this is right

  • If the central claim is correct, single-field inflationary predictions for ns, r, and fNL remain intact in any weakly coupled gravitational EFT, even when an SDC tower is present.
  • Observed deviations from single-field predictions cannot be blamed on a light tower of species unless H is within about an order of magnitude of Λsp, where the EFT itself is suspect.
  • The Swampland Distance Conjecture does not automatically produce trapped-inflation-like dissipation or large non-Gaussianities in the weakly coupled regime.
  • The constraint H ≤ Λsp, already used to limit inflaton field ranges, is also the controlling parameter for all tower-induced corrections to observables.
  • For denser towers (p > 1), corrections are even more suppressed, strengthening the conclusion that tower effects are negligible away from the quantum-gravity scale.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's large-NH assumption could hide a qualitative change when only a handful of tower modes are light; a numerical evaluation with NH = 1, 2, or 3 would test whether the (H/Λsp)^(2+p) scaling survives or whether corrections become order-one.
  • Because the Higuchi bound likely forces Kaluza-Klein gravitons to remain heavier than H, realistic string embeddings may push the whole tower above H, making corrections exponentially smaller than the paper's already-small estimate.
  • The same exponential mass coupling appears in quintessence models; if the inflationary suppression is this efficient, analogous dark-energy probes would need H/Λsp near unity to see any effect, which may sharpen the case that such towers are phenomenologically invisible at low energy.
  • Future CMB experiments with sensitivity to r or ns at the 10^-3 level could, in principle, place lower bounds on Λsp/H, though the paper's result suggests these bounds will be weak unless the EFT is near its breaking scale.

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

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies a single-field inflation model coupled to an infinite tower of scalar fields whose masses depend exponentially on the inflaton, m_n = n^{1/p} m_1 e^{-γφ}, as suggested by the Swampland Distance Conjecture. After deriving the mode functions for the tower fields in a quasi-de Sitter background, the authors compute the backreaction and the sourced contributions to the scalar and tensor power spectra and to f_NL. Their central result is that, for a light tower satisfying m_tower ≪ H, all corrections are proportional to (H/Λ_sp)^{2+p} with p ≥ 1, so they are negligible as long as H ≪ Λ_sp. The paper applies the result to power-law, monomial, Starobinsky-like, and inverse-hilltop potentials and compares the predictions with Planck, BICEP/Keck, and ACT data.

Significance. If valid, the result is an important and somewhat surprising no-go statement: the exponentially light towers required by the SDC do not produce detectable inflationary signatures until the EFT is on the verge of breakdown. The computation is analytic, the scaling is derived rather than fitted, the generalization to arbitrary tower density p is given, and the authors are transparent about the main physical obstruction (the Higuchi bound). These are genuine strengths. However, the comparison with current data is illustrative rather than a likelihood analysis, and the physical embedding of the light scalar tower is an assumption rather than a construction. These caveats limit the universality of the abstract's claim but do not invalidate the mode-function calculation itself.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 3.2.1 and Conclusions] The light-mode regime that produces the (H/Λ_sp)^{2+p} scaling requires scalar tower states with m_scalar < H (Constraint C3). In a KK realization, a scalar tower is accompanied by a tower of massive spin-2 KK gravitons, and Eq. (3.32) (the Higuchi bound) forbids m_spin-2^2 < 2H^2. The paper acknowledges this and states that 'we do not specify a concrete mechanism, but rather assume that an effective scale separation arises because only the KK scalars couple directly to the inflaton.' No construction or reference realizing such a splitting is provided. This is load-bearing: if the spin-2 states are also light, the light scalar tower is not a consistent weakly-coupled EFT in de Sitter; if the tower mass is instead above H, Eq. (3.31) gives exponentially small, not polynomially suppressed, corrections, and the central scaling does not apply. The abstract's statement that such couplings 'na
  2. [Sec. 3.2.2 / Constraint C3 / Eq. (1.3)] The derivation of the universal scaling assumes N_H ≫ 1, with at least about ten modes below H. The position-space variance in Eq. (3.35) uses δ_n ≪ 1, and the sums in Eqs. (3.39) and (C.13) replace the mode sum by N_H/3; these steps fail when N_H is O(1). The paper calls C3 a 'practical choice', but Eq. (1.3) and the abstract present the scaling without this caveat. If N_H = O(1), the two-point function and the sum over light modes are not controlled by the same expressions, so the claimed universal power (H/Λ_sp)^{2+p} is not established in that case. The conclusions should state the domain of validity of the scaling, or an argument should be added showing that the result remains an upper bound for small N_H.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.1, Eq. (3.20)] The text says the species-scale timescale must be much longer than the Hubble timescale, and Eq. (3.23) indeed implies t_sp ≫ t_H, but Eq. (3.20) states t_sp ≪ t_H. The inequality in Eq. (3.20) should be reversed.
  2. [Eq. (3.57)] The displayed expression '1 + η0 − 2ε0' does not follow from Eq. (3.56) and is inconsistent with the standard result used in Eq. (4.2) and Appendix D. It should likely read '1 + 2η0 − 4ε0'. Please correct the typo.
  3. [Sec. 4 / Fig. 4] The comparison with ACT/BK18/Planck data is visual. The text should state more explicitly that no full likelihood analysis is performed and that the plots are illustrative of the parametric suppression.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: tower corrections are derived from mode equations and species-scale counting, not from the target conclusion.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, δ{ns,r,fNL} ∝ (H/Λsp)^{2+p}, is derived from explicit sums over tower modes. Each light scalar mode contributes a two-point function ⟨χn^2⟩ ∝ 1/δn, which cancels the mode mass in the coupling, so the total backreaction is proportional to NH, the number of modes below H. Using the species-scale relation Λsp^{2+p} = MP^2 mt^p and NH ≃ (H/mt)^p, the result NH H^2 ∝ (H/Λsp)^{2+p} follows algebraically. No parameter is fitted to the observables, and the comparison to Planck/ACT/BICEP/Keck data is illustrative rather than a fit. Constraint C1 (H ≪ Λsp) is a physical input, and the smallness of the corrections is a legitimate consequence of that input, not a restatement of the prediction. The paper explicitly acknowledges the Higuchi-bound obstruction for KK towers and assumes, without a concrete mechanism, an effective scalar/spin-2 mass splitting; this is a stated physical assumption and a limitation, not a circular reduction. Self-citations are used only for background results or alternative consistency arguments (e.g., [17], [72], [73]) and are not load-bearing for the central derivation, which is self-contained given the stated tower action and the SDC-inspired mass ansatz.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 8 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the SDC conjecture, the species-scale relation, and a set of modeling choices: the tower spectrum, the absence of a χ zero mode, the large-NH limit, and the evasion of the Higuchi bound through an unspecified scale-separation mechanism. The latter two are the most fragile because they are presented as practical/assumed rather than derived.

free parameters (6)
  • γ (exponential mass-decay coefficient) = γ = sqrt(1/2) and sqrt(3/2) (benchmark; not fitted)
    Input coupling from SDC; in plots taken at bounds of eq. (3.10); central scaling holds for any γ=O(1).
  • m1 (mass of first tower state)
    Sets the tower scale; ratio H/m1 controls NH (eq. 3.15); not fitted but constrained by C3.
  • p (tower density exponent) = p=1 (main text), p>1 (Appendix A)
    Parametrizes mn = n^{1/p} m1; p=1 equi-spaced KK tower; generalization in Appendix A gives (H/Λsp)^{2+p}.
  • λ (potential parameter for inverse hilltop/Starobinsky) = λ=4 and λ=8·10^{3/8}/3^{5/8} (benchmarks)
    Chosen in the observational illustrations (Appendix D); not fitted to CMB data; the conclusion does not depend on λ.
  • q (inverse hilltop shape parameter) = q=4 and q-2=2/3 (benchmarks)
    Chosen benchmark values in Appendix D to illustrate the model class.
  • V0 (potential amplitude) = set by COBE normalization Pζ≈2.1e-9
    Amplitude of each potential fixed by observed scalar power spectrum, as standard in inflationary model comparison.
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption Swampland Distance Conjecture: traversing super-Planckian field distance in field space implies an infinite tower with mass scale mt ∼ e^{-γΔφ} (eq. 1.2).
    Core motivation; unproved conjecture assumed to hold; γ bounded by (3.10).
  • domain assumption Species scale formula Λsp = M_P/√Nsp (eq. 1.1), with Nsp the number of species below the cutoff.
    Standard quantum-gravity result from literature; used to derive Λsp = M_P^{2/3} m_t^{1/3}.
  • domain assumption Tower mass spectrum takes the form mn = n^{1/p} m_t (eq. 3.2).
    Parametrizes infinite tower; p=1 for equi-spaced KK tower; not derived in the paper.
  • standard math χn fields start in the Bunch-Davies vacuum and are Gaussian, with no homogeneous zero mode ⟨χn⟩=0.
    Assumed in Sec. 2.1/3.2 to solve mode equations and compute n-point functions via Wick contractions.
  • domain assumption The tower masses vary adiabatically during slow roll (δn nearly constant; Constraint C2).
    Needed for the Hankel solution (3.28) and for treating δn as constant in sums; eq. (3.23).
  • ad hoc to paper A large number of light modes, NH≫1 (Constraint C3), with at least ~10 modes below H.
    Required for the δn≪1 expansion and for replacing sums by the large-NH limit; not physically forced.
  • ad hoc to paper No massive spin-2 KK gravitons below the Hubble scale; effective scale separation between scalar and spin-2 tower masses.
    Explicitly assumed in Sec. 3.2.1 and Conclusions to evade the Higuchi bound; no concrete mechanism supplied.
  • domain assumption The inflationary potential V(φ) is arbitrary and not UV-completed.
    The paper remains agnostic about the fundamental origin of V (footnote 3); results apply to any slow-roll potential satisfying constraints.
invented entities (1)
  • Scale separation between KK scalar and spin-2 tower masses no independent evidence
    purpose: Allows light scalar tower below Hubble to source particle production without violating the Higuchi bound for massive gravitons
    The authors state 'we do not specify a concrete mechanism, but rather assume that an effective scale separation arises' (Conclusions); no falsifiable prediction is given, so it is an invented ledger entry.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 43688 in / 18303 out tokens · 165409 ms · 2026-08-03T17:49:48.947281+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate the impact of particle production during inflation in scenarios where an infinite tower of states features a mass scale that decreases exponentially along the inflationary trajectory. Such couplings naturally arise in string effective field theories and are in fact motivated by the Swampland Distance Conjecture (SDC). We show that the corrections to inflationary observables sourced by the tower scale as $(H/\Lambda_{\text{sp}})^{2+p}$, with $H$ being the Hubble scale, $\Lambda_{\text{sp}}$ being the species scale, that is the quantum gravity cut-off, and $p\geq 1$ characterizes the density of states in the tower. As a result, in gravitationally weakly coupled cosmological effective theories, the tower-induced contributions are suppressed relative to the standard single-field predictions, leaving the inflationary phenomenology essentially unchanged. We demonstrate this explicitly across a set of well-motivated inflationary potentials, and we compare the resulting predictions with the most recent observational constraints, including those from the Atacama Cosmology Telescope.

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. Global Asymptotics, the Swampland Conjectures, and Preheating of String Moduli

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    Global asymptotic shape, not just local curvature, controls tachyonic self-resonant preheating of string moduli, and stochastic light-tower effects mostly smear existing resonance bands.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Black Holes and Large N Species Solution to the Hierarchy Problem,

    G. Dvali, “Black Holes and Large N Species Solution to the Hierarchy Problem,” Fortsch. Phys. 58 (2010) 528–536, arXiv:0706.2050 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  2. [2]

    Black Hole Bound on the Number of Species and Quantum Gravity at LHC,

    G. Dvali and M. Redi, “Black Hole Bound on the Number of Species and Quantum Gravity at LHC,” Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 045027, arXiv:0710.4344 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  3. [3]

    Evaporation of Microscopic Black Holes in String Theory and the Bound on Species,

    G. Dvali and D. L¨ ust, “Evaporation of Microscopic Black Holes in String Theory and the Bound on Species,” Fortsch. Phys. 58 (2010) 505–527, arXiv:0912.3167 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  4. [4]

    Species and Strings,

    G. Dvali and C. Gomez, “Species and Strings,” arXiv:1004.3744 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  5. [5]

    Black Hole Quantum Mechanics in the Presence of Species,

    G. Dvali, C. Gomez, and D. L¨ ust, “Black Hole Quantum Mechanics in the Presence of Species,” Fortsch. Phys. 61 (2013) 768–778, arXiv:1206.2365 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  6. [6]

    Scales of gravity,

    G. R. Dvali, G. Gabadadze, M. Kolanovic, and F. Nitti, “Scales of gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 024031, arXiv:hep-th/0106058

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  7. [7]

    Large N bounds on, and compositeness limit of, gauge and gravitational interactions,

    G. Veneziano, “Large N bounds on, and compositeness limit of, gauge and gravitational interactions,” JHEP 06 (2002) 051, arXiv:hep-th/0110129

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  8. [8]

    Predictive landscapes and new physics at a TeV,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and S. Kachru, “Predictive landscapes and new physics at a TeV,” arXiv:hep-th/0501082

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  9. [9]

    Random polynomials and the friendly landscape,

    J. Distler and U. Varadarajan, “Random polynomials and the friendly landscape,” arXiv:hep-th/0507090

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  10. [10]

    The String landscape and the swampland,

    C. Vafa, “The String landscape and the swampland,” arXiv:hep-th/0509212

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    On the Geometry of the String Landscape and the Swampland,

    H. Ooguri and C. Vafa, “On the Geometry of the String Landscape and the Swampland,” Nucl. Phys. B 766 (2007) 21–33, arXiv:hep-th/0605264

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  12. [12]

    The Swampland: Introduction and Review,

    E. Palti, “The Swampland: Introduction and Review,” Fortsch. Phys. 67 no. 6, (2019) 1900037, arXiv:1903.06239 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  13. [13]

    Lectures on the string landscape and the Swampland,

    N. B. Agmon, A. Bedroya, M. J. Kang, and C. Vafa, “Lectures on the string landscape and the Swampland,” arXiv:2212.06187 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  14. [14]

    Backreacted Axion Field Ranges in String Theory,

    F. Baume and E. Palti, “Backreacted Axion Field Ranges in String Theory,” JHEP 08 (2016) 043, arXiv:1602.06517 [hep-th]. – 32 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  15. [15]

    Super-Planckian Spatial Field Variations and Quantum Gravity,

    D. Klaewer and E. Palti, “Super-Planckian Spatial Field Variations and Quantum Gravity,” JHEP 01 (2017) 088, arXiv:1610.00010 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  16. [16]

    Trans-Planckian Censorship and the Swampland,

    A. Bedroya and C. Vafa, “Trans-Planckian Censorship and the Swampland,” JHEP 09 (2020) 123, arXiv:1909.11063 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    Swampland distance conjecture, inflation and α-attractors,

    M. Scalisi and I. Valenzuela, “Swampland distance conjecture, inflation and α-attractors,” JHEP 08 (2019) 160, arXiv:1812.07558 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  18. [18]

    Species Scale and Primordial Gravitational Waves,

    M. Scalisi, “Species Scale and Primordial Gravitational Waves,” Fortsch. Phys. 72 no. 6, (2024) 2400033, arXiv:2401.09533 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    The web of swampland conjectures and the TCC bound,

    D. Andriot, N. Cribiori, and D. Erkinger, “The web of swampland conjectures and the TCC bound,” JHEP 07 (2020) 162, arXiv:2004.00030 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  20. [20]

    Merging the weak gravity and distance conjectures using BPS extremal black holes,

    N. Gendler and I. Valenzuela, “Merging the weak gravity and distance conjectures using BPS extremal black holes,” JHEP 01 (2021) 176, arXiv:2004.10768 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  21. [21]

    Sharpening the Distance Conjecture in diverse dimensions,

    M. Etheredge, B. Heidenreich, S. Kaya, Y. Qiu, and T. Rudelius, “Sharpening the Distance Conjecture in diverse dimensions,” JHEP 12 (2022) 114, arXiv:2206.04063 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    Bounds on Species Scale and the Distance Conjecture,

    D. van de Heisteeg, C. Vafa, and M. Wiesner, “Bounds on Species Scale and the Distance Conjecture,” Fortsch. Phys. 71 no. 10-11, (2023) 2300143, arXiv:2303.13580 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Starobinsky inflation in the swampland,

    D. L¨ ust, J. Masias, B. Muntz, and M. Scalisi, “Starobinsky inflation in the swampland,” JHEP 07 (2024) 186, arXiv:2312.13210 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Higher Curvature Inflation and the Species Scale,

    J. Masias, “Higher Curvature Inflation and the Species Scale,” arXiv:2510.23715 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  25. [25]

    Emergent strings from infinite distance limits,

    S.-J. Lee, W. Lerche, and T. Weigand, “Emergent strings from infinite distance limits,” JHEP 02 (2022) 190, arXiv:1910.01135 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  26. [26]

    Shedding black hole light on the emergent string conjecture,

    I. Basile, D. L¨ ust, and C. Montella, “Shedding black hole light on the emergent string conjecture,” JHEP 07 (2024) 208, arXiv:2311.12113 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    On the Origin of Species Thermodynamics and the Black Hole - Tower Correspondence,

    A. Herr´ aez, D. L¨ ust, J. Masias, and M. Scalisi, “On the Origin of Species Thermodynamics and the Black Hole - Tower Correspondence,” arXiv:2406.17851 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  28. [28]

    Moduli-dependent species scale,

    D. van de Heisteeg, C. Vafa, M. Wiesner, and D. H. Wu, “Moduli-dependent species scale,” Beijing J. Pure Appl. Math. 1 no. 1, (2024) 1–41, arXiv:2212.06841 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    IR/UV mixing, towers of species and swampland conjectures,

    A. Castellano, A. Herr´ aez, and L. E. Ib´ a˜ nez, “IR/UV mixing, towers of species and swampland conjectures,” JHEP 08 (2022) 217, arXiv:2112.10796 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  30. [30]

    The Asymptotic dS Swampland Conjecture - a Simplified Derivation and a Potential Loophole,

    A. Hebecker and T. Wrase, “The Asymptotic dS Swampland Conjecture - a Simplified Derivation and a Potential Loophole,” Fortsch. Phys. 67 no. 1-2, (2019) 1800097, arXiv:1810.08182 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  31. [31]

    Bounds on field range for slowly varying positive potentials,

    D. van de Heisteeg, C. Vafa, M. Wiesner, and D. H. Wu, “Bounds on field range for slowly varying positive potentials,” JHEP 02 (2024) 175, arXiv:2305.07701 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Cosmological constraints from UV/IR mixing,

    N. Cribiori and F. Tonioni, “Cosmological constraints from UV/IR mixing,” arXiv:2507.02738 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  33. [33]

    Phantom matters,

    D. Andriot, “Phantom matters,” Phys. Dark Univ. 49 (2025) 102000, arXiv:2505.10410 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    Long-lived SEC violation via DM/DE couplings,

    G. Shiu, F. Tonioni, and H. V. Tran, “Long-lived SEC violation via DM/DE couplings,” arXiv:2506.19914 [hep-th]. – 33 –

    arXiv

  35. [35]

    Evolving Dark Sector and the Dark Dimension Scenario,

    A. Bedroya, G. Obied, C. Vafa, and D. H. Wu, “Evolving Dark Sector and the Dark Dimension Scenario,” arXiv:2507.03090 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  36. [36]

    A First principles warm inflation model that solves the cosmological horizon / flatness problems,

    A. Berera, M. Gleiser, and R. O. Ramos, “A First principles warm inflation model that solves the cosmological horizon / flatness problems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 264–267, arXiv:hep-ph/9809583

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  37. [37]

    Particle production and reheating in the inflationary universe,

    I. G. Moss and C. M. Graham, “Particle production and reheating in the inflationary universe,” Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 123526, arXiv:0810.2039 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  38. [38]

    Trapped Inflation,

    D. Green, B. Horn, L. Senatore, and E. Silverstein, “Trapped Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 063533, arXiv:0902.1006 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  39. [39]

    Gravity waves and non-Gaussian features from particle production in a sector gravitationally coupled to the inflaton,

    N. Barnaby, J. Moxon, R. Namba, M. Peloso, G. Shiu, and P. Zhou, “Gravity waves and non-Gaussian features from particle production in a sector gravitationally coupled to the inflaton,” Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 103508, arXiv:1206.6117 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  40. [40]

    Trapped inflation,

    D. Green, B. Horn, L. Senatore, and E. Silverstein, “Trapped inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 80 (Sep, 2009) 063533. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.80.063533

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.80.063533 2009

  41. [41]

    The phenomenology of trapped inflation,

    L. Pearce, M. Peloso, and L. Sorbo, “The phenomenology of trapped inflation,” JCAP 11 (2016) 058, arXiv:1603.08021 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  42. [42]

    Large-Field Inflation and the Cosmological Collider,

    M. Reece, L.-T. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu, “Large-Field Inflation and the Cosmological Collider,” arXiv:2204.11869 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  43. [43]

    Heavy Field Effects on Inflationary Models in Light of ACT Data,

    S. Aoki, H. Otsuka, and R. Yanagita, “Heavy Field Effects on Inflationary Models in Light of ACT Data,” arXiv:2509.06739 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  44. [44]

    The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Constraints on Extended Cosmological Models,

    ACT Collaboration, E. Calabrese et al. , “The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Constraints on Extended Cosmological Models,” arXiv:2503.14454 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  45. [45]

    Inflation,

    D. Baumann, “Inflation,” in Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: Physics of the Large and the Small , pp. 523–686. 2011. arXiv:0907.5424 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  46. [46]

    Theory of cosmological perturbations. Part 1. Classical perturbations. Part 2. Quantum theory of perturbations. Part 3. Extensions,

    V. F. Mukhanov, H. A. Feldman, and R. H. Brandenberger, “Theory of cosmological perturbations. Part 1. Classical perturbations. Part 2. Quantum theory of perturbations. Part 3. Extensions,” Phys. Rept. 215 (1992) 203–333

    1992

  47. [47]

    Cosmological Perturbation Theory,

    H. Kodama and M. Sasaki, “Cosmological Perturbation Theory,” Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 78 (1984) 1–166

    1984

  48. [48]

    Theory of cosmological perturbations,

    V. Mukhanov, H. Feldman, and R. Brandenberger, “Theory of cosmological perturbations,” Physics Reports 215 no. 5, (1992) 203–333. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/037015739290044Z

    arXiv 1992

  49. [49]

    Measuring polarization in cosmic microwave background,

    U. Seljak, “Measuring polarization in cosmic microwave background,” Astrophys. J. 482 (1997) 6, arXiv:astro-ph/9608131

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  50. [50]

    Signature of gravity waves in polarization of the microwave background,

    U. Seljak and M. Zaldarriaga, “Signature of gravity waves in polarization of the microwave background,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 2054–2057, arXiv:astro-ph/9609169

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  51. [51]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim et al. , “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,” Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6, arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  52. [52]

    Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation,

    Planck Collaboration, Y. Akrami et al. , “Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation,” Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A10, arXiv:1807.06211 [astro-ph.CO]. – 34 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  53. [53]

    Improved Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season,

    BICEP , KeckCollaboration, P. A. R. Ade et al. , “Improved Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 no. 15, (2021) 151301, arXiv:2110.00483 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2018

  54. [54]

    How long before the end of inflation were observable perturbations produced?,

    A. R. Liddle and S. M. Leach, “How long before the end of inflation were observable perturbations produced?,” Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 103503, arXiv:astro-ph/0305263

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  55. [55]

    First CMB Constraints on the Inflationary Reheating Temperature,

    J. Martin and C. Ringeval, “First CMB Constraints on the Inflationary Reheating Temperature,” Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 023511, arXiv:1004.5525 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  56. [56]

    Large Nongaussianity in Axion Inflation,

    N. Barnaby and M. Peloso, “Large Nongaussianity in Axion Inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 181301, arXiv:1011.1500 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  57. [57]

    Gauge Field Production in Axion Inflation: Consequences for Monodromy, non-Gaussianity in the CMB, and Gravitational Waves at Interferometers,

    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. D 85 (2012) 023525, arXiv:1110.3327 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  58. [58]

    Planck 2018 results. IX. Constraints on primordial non-Gaussianity,

    Planck Collaboration, Y. Akrami et al. , “Planck 2018 results. IX. Constraints on primordial non-Gaussianity,” Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A9, arXiv:1905.05697 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  59. [59]

    Particle production during inflation and gravitational waves detectable by ground-based interferometers,

    J. L. Cook and L. Sorbo, “Particle production during inflation and gravitational waves detectable by ground-based interferometers,” Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 023534, arXiv:1109.0022 [astro-ph.CO]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 86, 069901 (2012)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  60. [60]

    Theory and Numerics of Gravitational Waves from Preheating after Inflation,

    J. F. Dufaux, A. Bergman, G. N. Felder, L. Kofman, and J.-P. Uzan, “Theory and Numerics of Gravitational Waves from Preheating after Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 123517, arXiv:0707.0875 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  61. [61]

    Cosmological Fluctuations from Infra-Red Cascading During Inflation,

    N. Barnaby, Z. Huang, L. Kofman, and D. Pogosyan, “Cosmological Fluctuations from Infra-Red Cascading During Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 043501, arXiv:0902.0615 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  62. [62]

    Towards the theory of reheating after inflation,

    L. Kofman, A. D. Linde, and A. A. Starobinsky, “Towards the theory of reheating after inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 3258–3295, arXiv:hep-ph/9704452

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  63. [63]

    Beauty is attractive: Moduli trapping at enhanced symmetry points,

    L. Kofman, A. D. Linde, X. Liu, A. Maloney, L. McAllister, and E. Silverstein, “Beauty is attractive: Moduli trapping at enhanced symmetry points,” JHEP 05 (2004) 030, arXiv:hep-th/0403001

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  64. [64]

    Bulk/boundary modular quintessence and DESI,

    L. A. Anchordoqui, I. Antoniadis, N. Cribiori, A. Hasar, D. L¨ ust, J. Masias, and M. Scalisi, “Bulk/boundary modular quintessence and DESI,” JHEP 09 (2025) 128, arXiv:2506.02731 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Universal Pattern in Quantum Gravity at Infinite Distance,

    A. Castellano, I. Ruiz, and I. Valenzuela, “Universal Pattern in Quantum Gravity at Infinite Distance,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 no. 18, (2024) 181601, arXiv:2311.01501 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  66. [66]

    Corrections to the CR V pattern,

    I. Basile and G. Staudt, “Corrections to the CR V pattern,” arXiv:2503.00107 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  67. [67]

    Species entropy and thermodynamics,

    N. Cribiori, D. L¨ ust, and C. Montella, “Species entropy and thermodynamics,” JHEP 10 (2023) 059, arXiv:2305.10489 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  68. [68]

    A short overview on the Black Hole-Tower Correspondence and Species Thermodynamics,

    A. Herr´ aez, D. L¨ ust, J. Masias, and C. Montella, “A short overview on the Black Hole-Tower Correspondence and Species Thermodynamics,” in 24th Hellenic School and Workshops on Elementary Particle Physics and Gravity . 6, 2025. arXiv:2506.02335 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  69. [69]

    Demystifying the Emergence Proposal,

    R. Blumenhagen, N. Cribiori, A. Gligovic, and A. Paraskevopoulou, “Demystifying the Emergence Proposal,” JHEP 04 (2024) 053, arXiv:2309.11551 [hep-th]. – 35 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  70. [70]

    Emergence of R 4-terms in M-theory,

    R. Blumenhagen, N. Cribiori, A. Gligovic, and A. Paraskevopoulou, “Emergence of R 4-terms in M-theory,” JHEP 07 (2024) 018, arXiv:2404.01371 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    Forbidden Mass Range for Spin-2 Field Theory in De Sitter Space-time,

    A. Higuchi, “Forbidden Mass Range for Spin-2 Field Theory in De Sitter Space-time,” Nucl. Phys. B 282 (1987) 397–436

    1987

  72. [72]

    Inflation, Higher Spins and the Swampland,

    M. Scalisi, “Inflation, Higher Spins and the Swampland,” Phys. Lett. B 808 (2020) 135683, arXiv:1912.04283 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  73. [73]

    A Note on String Excitations and the Higuchi Bound,

    D. L¨ ust and E. Palti, “A Note on String Excitations and the Higuchi Bound,” Phys. Lett. B 799 (2019) 135067, arXiv:1907.04161 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  74. [74]

    Power Law Inflation,

    F. Lucchin and S. Matarrese, “Power Law Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 32 (1985) 1316

    1985

  75. [75]

    Chaotic Inflation,

    A. D. Linde, “Chaotic Inflation,” Phys. Lett. B 129 (1983) 177–181

    1983

  76. [76]

    Superconformal Inflationary α-Attractors,

    R. Kallosh, A. Linde, and D. Roest, “Superconformal Inflationary α-Attractors,” JHEP 11 (2013) 198, arXiv:1311.0472 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  77. [77]

    Unity of Cosmological Inflation Attractors,

    M. Galante, R. Kallosh, A. Linde, and D. Roest, “Unity of Cosmological Inflation Attractors,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 no. 14, (2015) 141302, arXiv:1412.3797 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  78. [78]

    Cosmological attractors from α-scale supergravity,

    D. Roest and M. Scalisi, “Cosmological attractors from α-scale supergravity,” Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 043525, arXiv:1503.07909 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  79. [79]

    A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity,

    A. A. Starobinsky, “A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity,” Phys. Lett. B 91 (1980) 99–102

    1980

  80. [80]

    Pole inflation — Shift symmetry and universal corrections,

    B. J. Broy, M. Galante, D. Roest, and A. Westphal, “Pole inflation — Shift symmetry and universal corrections,” JHEP 12 (2015) 149, arXiv:1507.02277 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

Showing first 80 references.