Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Gravitational wave anisotropies from axion inflation

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Sourced gravitational waves from axion inflation can have order-0.1 anisotropies in their energy-density correlator, a level that would make the cosmic gravitational-wave background anisotropic enough for next-generation detectors.

desk verdict New calculation of the sourced GW energy-density auto-correlator in axion inflation with a headline O(10^{-1}) anisotropy that depends sensitively on a slow-roll-derived response factor applied in the strong-backreaction regime. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13156 v1 pith:KEMRHIHN submitted 2025-04-17 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-phhep-th

Sofia P. Corbà This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.COgr-qchep-phhep-th
keywords stochasticgravitationalwavebackgroundaxioninflationanisotropiessourcedtensormodesgaugefieldproductioninversedecayextrinsiccorrelatorCMBcross-correlation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper asks whether axion inflation leaves a detectable anisotropic pattern in the stochastic gravitational wave background. It argues that the dominant contribution is not the vacuum tensor modes, whose anisotropy correlator is tiny, but the extrinsic part of the sourced modes: the modulation of short-wavelength sourced gravitational waves by long-wavelength curvature perturbations. Normalized by the expected fractional energy density in sourced gravitational waves at interferometer frequencies, this correlator can reach O($10^{-1}$), with a central estimate of 2.4 times $10^{-1}$. If true, the gravitational-wave sky from axion inflation could be anisotropic enough for future detectors and for cross-correlation with CMB anisotropies, offering a way to tell a cosmological background from an astrophysical one.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing relation is the linear response formula for sourced tensor modes, $\delta h_{ij,S} = -2\pi\frac{d\xi}{d\phi_0}\frac{\dot\phi_0}{H}\zeta_V\, h^0_{ij,S}$ (eq. 2.31), where $\xi=\dot\phi_0/(2fH)$ is the gauge-field amplification parameter. It converts long-wavelength vacuum curvature perturbations $\zeta_V$ into a multiplicative modulation of the short-wavelength sourced gravitational-wave amplitude. Substituting this into the four-point function of sourced tensor modes and applying Wick's theorem, the term labeled $C_D$ contains a delta function $\delta(k-p_3)$ that cancels the $k^3$ prefactor in the correlator definition, producing a scale-invariant extrinsic contribution. The amplitude is set by the parametrization (4.18), in which $\xi$ grows logarithmically before backreaction and then becomes nearly constant.

What would settle it

Run a lattice simulation of axion inflation through the strong-backreaction regime and measure the modulation of short-wavelength sourced tensor modes by a long-wavelength curvature perturbation; if the response deviates from $-2\pi\frac{d\xi}{d\phi_0}\frac{\dot\phi_0}{H}$ at the level assumed in eq. (2.31), the predicted $O(10^{-1})$ extrinsic correlator collapses. Alternatively, an observational upper bound on the normalized GW anisotropy correlator below $10^{-3}$ at interferometer frequencies, in a model where sourcing is confirmed by a chiral signal, would contradict the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's main result is that the scale-invariant part of the sourced extrinsic correlator of the gravitational-wave energy density, computed in the large-momentum regime and normalized by the square of the fractional sourced energy, is $C^{S.I.}_{\Omega\Omega}(k)\big|_{l.m.} \simeq \frac{9.8\times10^{-5}}{\delta^2}\left(2\pi\frac{d\xi}{d\phi_0}\frac{\dot\phi_0}{H}\right)^2$, which lies between $2.4\times10^{-5}$ and $2.4\times10^{-1}$ for the backreaction growth parameter $\delta$ in the range $0.06$--$0.2$ (eq. 4.29). The intrinsic sourced correlator, the subdominant extrinsic terms, and the vacuum correlator are all suppressed by $(k/k_{BR})^3$ with $k\sim k_{CMB}$, making them unobservable. The paper concludes that this scale-invariant extrinsic term is the only relevant component of the sourced correlator and that axion inflation can generate gravitational-wave anisotropies within observational reach.

Load-bearing premise

The linear response relation for sourced gravitational waves, derived perturbatively, is assumed to remain valid for interferometer-scale modes in the strong backreaction regime, where the inflaton-gauge-field system is nonperturbative.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The dominant observable in the axion-inflation gravitational-wave sky is the anisotropic part of the sourced background, not the isotropic vacuum signal.
  • The vacuum and intrinsic sourced correlators are suppressed by $(k/k_{BR})^3$ and are unobservable, so a detected anisotropy at the predicted level would point specifically to gauge-field sourcing.
  • Anisotropies of order $10^{-1}$ in the normalized correlator fall within the reach of next-generation gravitational-wave observatories, making the cosmological background distinguishable from the astrophysical one through its angular structure.
  • The scale-invariant extrinsic term imprints a correlation between interferometer-scale gravitational waves and CMB-scale scalar perturbations, motivating searches for cross-correlations between GW anisotropies and CMB temperature maps.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the same modulation mechanism should operate in any scenario where short-wavelength sourced tensor modes are linearly modulated by long-wavelength curvature perturbations, so the $O(10^{-1})$ scale is not specific to the axion potential but to the combination $2\pi(2\epsilon-\eta)\xi/\delta$; models with larger $\xi$ or smaller $\delta$ would predict even larger anisotropies.
  • Editorial inference: because the dominant term is scale-invariant and ties interferometer-scale tensor modes to CMB-scale scalars, the model predicts a specific cross-correlation between GW background anisotropies and CMB temperature anisotropies that could be measured even if the isotropic background is only marginally detectable.
  • Editorial inference: a direct lattice computation of the sourced tensor four-point function in the strong-backreaction regime would test whether the linear response relation (2.31) survives nonperturbatively, and would either confirm or revise the $2.4\times10^{-1}$ upper value.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper computes the normalized two-point correlator of the gravitational-wave energy density, C_ΩΩ(k), in axion inflation, and splits it into vacuum, sourced-intrinsic, sourced-extrinsic, and sourced-fluctuation contributions. The central result is eqs. (4.27)–(4.29): the scale-invariant part of the sourced extrinsic correlator is about 9.8×10^-5 / δ^2 × (2π dξ/dφ0 φ̇0/H)^2, which with δ ∈ [0.06, 0.2] and the slow-roll response factor (2.34) gives a range 2.4×10^-5 to 2.4×10^-1. The paper argues that all other contributions, including the vacuum correlator, the intrinsic sourced correlator, and the subdominant extrinsic terms, are suppressed by (k/k_BR)^3 and are therefore negligible for CMB-scale anisotropy modes. It concludes that axion inflation can produce gravitational-wave anisotropies large enough to be observable by future detectors.

Significance. If the central result holds, the paper provides a concrete and falsifiable target for stochastic-gravitational-wave anisotropy searches and strengthens the case that axion inflation can be distinguished from astrophysical backgrounds. A notable strength is the normalization by Ω_GW,S, which removes the exponential e^{4πξ} sensitivity and makes the prediction depend only on δ and on the response factor, so the quoted range is meaningful rather than dominated by the large exponential. The paper is also transparent about its main assumption, stated in Section 1, and the appendices contain a substantial amount of the calculation. The main risk, as detailed below, is that the slow-roll expression for dξ/dφ0 is used inside the strong-backreaction epoch, where the background equation of motion is modified; this is a serious but correctable issue rather than a fatal inconsistency.

major comments (4)
  1. [2.2–4.2.1, eqs. (2.31)–(2.34) and (4.28)] The headline value rests on evaluating the response factor R = 2π(dξ/dφ0)(φ̇0/H) with the slow-roll derivative dξ/dφ0 = (ϵ − η/2)/f, derived from 3H φ̇0 ≃ −V′. However, the sourced interferometer modes studied in Section 4 are produced near τ_BR, where gauge-field production adds a source term to the inflaton equation and the slow-roll relation is not guaranteed. The Section 1 statement that results written in terms of φ̇(t) remain valid addresses the amplitude h^0_{ij,S}, but not the derivative dξ/dφ0; the cited reference [41] does not establish (2.33) in the backreaction regime. Since (4.28) is quadratic in R and the quoted range (4.29) uses the O(0.1–3) bound of (2.34), an order-one change in dξ/dφ0 shifts the central prediction by orders of magnitude. Please derive or parametrize the backreacted response and propagate the resulting uncertainty.
  2. [2.2, eq. (2.31), used in (4.7)–(4.10)] The linear response relation δh_{ij,S} = R ζ_V h^0_{ij,S} is assumed to hold in the strong-backreaction regime, where the dynamics is nonperturbative. This relation is obtained from a first-order Taylor expansion of h^0 ∝ e^{2πξ}; in the backreacted background the response of the sourced tensor modes to long-wavelength ζ could be nonlocal, suppressed, or nonlinear in ζ. Because this relation is the mechanism that converts long-wavelength curvature perturbations into gravitational-wave anisotropies, the paper should state its regime of validity more carefully and, if possible, test it against lattice results such as those in [38,41].
  3. [4.1–4.2.2 and Appendices B–C] The momentum integrals are truncated at p = k_BR with the statement that contributions from momenta larger than k_BR are negligible. Under the parameterization (4.18), modes with p > k_BR are sourced at τ > τ_BR, where ξ = ξ_BR, so they carry the full e^{4πξ_BR} enhancement and no (τ_BR/τ)^{2πδ} suppression. The text does not justify why these modes can be dropped; if they contribute, the (k/k_BR)^3 suppression in (4.21), (4.30)–(4.32) and the coefficient of the scale-invariant term (4.27) would need revision. Please provide a physical estimate of the p > k_BR region or extend the integration.
  4. [Appendices B and C, eqs. (B.4)–(B.7), (C.3), (C.5)–(C.12)] The numerical angular integrals are quoted without derivation or method; examples include 1.4×10^4 in (B.4), 1.8×10^3 in (B.5), 4.4×10^4 in (C.3), and the closed-form results (C.5)–(C.12). Because the headline range (4.29) depends directly on I_S.I. through (4.27)–(4.28), these numbers are load-bearing. Please provide the angular integration procedure or a reproducibility notebook, and state the estimated error introduced by the 2^7-ordering truncation used throughout.
minor comments (5)
  1. [4.2, eq. (4.22)] There is a typo in the transfer-function argument: \(\hat T(|k+p_2)\) should read \(\hat T(|k+p_2|)\).
  2. [4, after eq. (4.10)] The statement that the correlator of the fluctuations C^F_ΩΩ is 'much smaller' is not quantified; a one-line estimate, e.g., its parametric suppression by P_ζ^2 and R^4, would make the neglect more transparent.
  3. [6, Conclusions] The abstract and conclusions state the result as 'O(10^-1)', but the actual range in (4.29) is 2.4×10^-5 to 2.4×10^-1; using both endpoints would give a more accurate summary of the prediction.
  4. [References] Reference [30] is incomplete: it lists only the arXiv number without a title or journal, and reference [5] similarly lacks a title.
  5. [4.2.1, eq. (4.25)] The angular part A_D is written down without derivation; a brief derivation using the polarization-sum identity (4.26) would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the sourced-anisotropy correlator is derived from model inputs, and the exponential dependence cancels only through the stated normalization by the sourced GW abundance; the residual amplitude is not fitted.

full rationale

The central result, C^{S.I.}_{Omega Omega}(k)|_{l.m.} in eqs. (4.27)-(4.29), is not imposed as an input. The paper derives it from the sourced tensor four-point function, the vacuum scalar power spectrum, and the linear response relation (2.31). The exponential factors e^{8 pi xi_BR} cancel only against Omega_GW,S^2 in the normalization (eqs. 4.2-4.3), so the final amplitude is controlled by the slow-roll response factor (2.33)-(2.34), P_zeta,V, and the parametrization (4.18) with delta taken from the external range 0.06-0.2. The response relation (2.31) is re-derived in the text from h0 proportional to e^{2 pi xi}, so the self-citation to [26] is contextual rather than the load-bearing justification. The claimed range O(10^-5 to 10^-1) is an arithmetic evaluation of eq. (4.28) over the stated parameter ranges, not a fit to the target correlator. The vacuum correlator (5.10) is explicitly identified as previously studied in the literature, and the sourced intrinsic and subdominant extrinsic terms are computed rather than assumed. The strong-backreaction applicability of expressions written in terms of dot phi(t) is an explicit assumption in Section 1 and a possible physical robustness concern, but it is an assumption about regime of validity, not a circular reduction of the result to its inputs. No step in the derivation chain is equivalent by construction to the quantity being predicted.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The normalized correlator is independent of xi_BR and H/M_P because Omega_GW,S^2 cancels the exponential and H^8 factors. The final range is controlled by two inputs: delta (external, from [37,41]) and the response coefficient R = 2 pi (2 epsilon - eta) xi (slow-roll dependent). No new entities are introduced. The calculation relies on standard perturbation theory plus domain assumptions about the strong backreaction regime.

free parameters (2)
  • delta (backreaction growth rate of xi) = 0.06 to 0.2
    Parametrizes the growth of xi after backreaction via xi(tau) = xi_BR + delta log(tau_BR/tau) for tau < tau_BR, eq. (4.18). Values taken from refs. [37] (0.06) and [41] (0.2). The main result scales as 1/delta^2, so the O(10^{-1}) maximum requires delta near 0.06.
  • R = 2 pi d xi/d phi0 dot phi0/H = 2 pi (2 epsilon - eta) xi = 0.1 to 3
    Response coefficient of sourced gravitational wave fluctuations to long-wavelength curvature perturbations, eqs. (2.31)-(2.34). The range reflects slow-roll parameters and xi ~ 2 to 5. The extrinsic correlator scales as R^2.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption WKB approximation for the amplified gauge mode A+ (eq. 2.13) is valid in the range 1/(8 xi) <~ |k tau| <~ 2 xi and is extended to all |k tau| of interest.
    Used to evaluate all sourced-mode integrals; standard in axion-inflation literature but an approximation without quantified error.
  • domain assumption Sourced gravitational wave production is described perturbatively even in the strong backreaction regime; results expressed in terms of dot phi(t) remain valid.
    Stated in Section 1: 'Since our results are expressed entirely in terms of dot phi(t), we assume them to remain valid even in the strong backreaction regime.' Relies on [41].
  • domain assumption The fluctuation of the sourced gravitational wave is delta h_{ij,S} = -2 pi d xi/d phi0 dot phi0/H zeta_V h^0_{ij,S} (eq. 2.31), valid for interferometer-scale p much greater than CMB-scale q.
    This linear response relation is the basis of the extrinsic correlator; the condition p >> q is stated after eq. (4.7).
  • standard math The retarded Green's function for super-horizon tensor modes can be expanded as G_{kappa_i}(tau, tau_i) ~ -H tau_i^2/3.
    Used after eq. (4.14) when kappa_i tau_i << 1, which is justified for the strongly amplified modes.
  • domain assumption xi(tau) evolves slowly after backreaction and is approximately constant for tau > tau_BR, with xi_BR ~ xi_INT; contributions from momenta larger than k_BR are negligible.
    Parametrization (4.18) and discussion in Section 4, based on lattice studies [40].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gravitational wave anisotropies from axion inflation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KEMRHIHN

@misc{pith2026250413156,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gravitational wave anisotropies from axion inflation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KEMRHIHN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13156}
}
abstract

An important prediction of inflation is the production of a primordial stochastic gravitational wave background. Observing this background is challenging due to the weakness of the signal and the simultaneous presence of an astrophysical background generated by many unresolved late-time sources. One possible way to distinguish between the two is to examine their anisotropies. In this paper we calculate the primordial correlation function of gravitational wave anisotropies in the cosmological background generated by axion inflation, where the inflaton is a pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone boson coupled to gauge fields. In this scenario, tensor modes arise not only from the standard amplification of vacuum fluctuations present in any inflationary model, but also from the inverse decay process of the produced gauge fields. The correlator of gravitational wave anisotropies consists therefore of two main components: the contribution from vacuum tensor modes and the contribution from tensor modes sourced by the gauge fields. Our analysis shows that, while the former, previously studied in the literature, is negligible, the one arising from the sourced tensor modes, normalized by the fractional energy density at interferometer frequencies, can reach values as large as $\mathcal{O}(10^{-1})$. This result shows that axion inflation can generate large anisotropies with the potential to be observed by gravitational wave detectors within a reasonable time frame.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Comparative study of the strong backreaction regime in axion inflation: the effect of the potential

    astro-ph.CO 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    In lattice simulations of axion inflation, the strong-backreaction stage that lengthens inflation occurs for all seven tested potentials, but its duration varies strongly with the potential.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

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

  1. [41]

    A flashing beacon in axion inflation: recurring bursts of gravitational waves in the strong backreaction regime,

    J. Garcia-Bellido, A. Papageorgiou, M. Peloso and L. Sorbo, “A flashing beacon in axion inflation: recurring bursts of gravitational waves in the strong backreaction regime,” [arXiv:2303.13425 [astro-ph.CO]]

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    B. P. Abbottet al. [LIGO Scientific and Virgo], Phys. Rev. Lett.116, no.6, 061102 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102 [arXiv:1602.03837 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv 2016

  3. [2]

    Agazie et al

    G. Agazie et al. [NANOGrav], Astrophys. J. Lett.951, no.1, L8 (2023) doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acdac6 [arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]]

    arXiv 2023

  4. [3]

    The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array - III. Search for gravitational wave signals,

    J. Antoniadis et al. [EPTA and InPTA:], “The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array - III. Search for gravitational wave signals,” Astron. Astrophys.678, A50 (2023) doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346844 [arXiv:2306.16214 [astro-ph.HE]]

    arXiv 2023

  5. [4]

    Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,

    D. J. Reardon, A. Zic, R. M. Shannon, G. B. Hobbs, M. Bailes, V. Di Marco, A. Kapur, A. F. Rogers, E. Thrane and J. Askew,et al. “Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,” Astrophys. J. Lett.951, no.1, L6 (2023) doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acdd02 [arXiv:2306.16215 [astro-ph.HE]]

    arXiv 2023

  6. [5]

    Allen, [arXiv:gr-qc/9604033 [gr-qc]]

    B. Allen, [arXiv:gr-qc/9604033 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv

  7. [6]

    Caprini and D

    C. Caprini and D. G. Figueroa, Class. Quant. Grav.35, no.16, 163001 (2018) doi:10.1088/1361-6382/aac608 [arXiv:1801.04268 [astro-ph.CO]]

    arXiv 2018

  8. [7]

    Regimbau, Res

    T. Regimbau, Res. Astron. Astrophys.11, 369-390 (2011) doi:10.1088/1674-4527/11/4/001 [arXiv:1101.2762 [astro-ph.CO]]

    arXiv 2011

Show all 45 references
  1. [8]

    A review of Axion Inflation in the era of Planck,

    E. Pajer and M. Peloso, “A review of Axion Inflation in the era of Planck,” Class. Quant. Grav. 30, 214002 (2013) doi:10.1088/0264-9381/30/21/214002 [arXiv:1305.3557 [hep-th]]

    2013 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Natural inflation with pseudo - Nambu-Goldstone bosons,

    K. Freese, J. A. Frieman and A. V. Olinto, “Natural inflation with pseudo - Nambu-Goldstone bosons,” Phys. Rev. Lett.65 (1990), 3233-3236 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.65.3233

    1990 doi

  3. [10]

    Parity violation in the Cosmic Microwave Background from a pseudoscalar inflaton,

    L. Sorbo, “Parity violation in the Cosmic Microwave Background from a pseudoscalar inflaton,” JCAP 06, 003 (2011) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2011/06/003 [arXiv:1101.1525 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2011 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Large Nongaussianity in Axion Inflation,

    N. Barnaby and M. Peloso, “Large Nongaussianity in Axion Inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 181301 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.181301 [arXiv:1011.1500 [hep-ph]]

    2011 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Scale-dependent gravitational waves from a rolling axion,

    R. Namba, M. Peloso, M. Shiraishi, L. Sorbo and C. Unal, “Scale-dependent gravitational waves from a rolling axion,” JCAP01, 041 (2016) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/01/041 [arXiv:1509.07521 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2016 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Gauge field production in supergravity inflation: Local non-Gaussianity and primordial black holes,

    A. Linde, S. Mooij and E. Pajer, “Gauge field production in supergravity inflation: Local non-Gaussianity and primordial black holes,” Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) no.10, 103506 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.103506 [arXiv:1212.1693 [hep-th]]

    2013 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Hypermagnetic Fields and Baryon Asymmetry from Pseudoscalar Inflation,

    M. M. Anber and E. Sabancilar, “Hypermagnetic Fields and Baryon Asymmetry from Pseudoscalar Inflation,” Phys. Rev. D92, no.10, 101501 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.101501 [arXiv:1507.00744 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Primordial magnetic fields from pseudoGoldstone bosons,

    W. D. Garretson, G. B. Field and S. M. Carroll, “Primordial magnetic fields from pseudoGoldstone bosons,” Phys. Rev. D46, 5346-5351 (1992) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.5346 [arXiv:hep-ph/9209238 [hep-ph]]. – 28 –

    1992 arXiv

  9. [16]

    M. M. Anber and L. Sorbo, JCAP10, 018 (2006) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2006/10/018 [arXiv:astro-ph/0606534 [astro-ph]]

    2006 arXiv

  10. [17]

    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. D85, 023534 (2012) [erratum: Phys. Rev. D 86, 069901 (2012)] doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.023534 [arXiv:1109.0022 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2012 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Search for anisotropic gravitational-wave backgrounds using data from Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo’s first three observing runs,

    R. Abbott et al. [KAGRA, Virgo and LIGO Scientific], “Search for anisotropic gravitational-wave backgrounds using data from Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo’s first three observing runs,” Phys. Rev. D104, no.2, 022005 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.022005 [arXiv:2103.08520 [gr-qc]]

    2021

  12. [19]

    Probing anisotropies of the Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with LISA,

    N. Bartolo et al. [LISA Cosmology Working Group], “Probing anisotropies of the Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with LISA,” JCAP11, 009 (2022) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2022/11/009 [arXiv:2201.08782 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2022 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Primordial Anisotropies in the Gravitational Wave Background from Cosmological Phase Transitions,

    M. Geller, A. Hook, R. Sundrum and Y. Tsai, “Primordial Anisotropies in the Gravitational Wave Background from Cosmological Phase Transitions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121 (2018) no.20, 201303 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.201303 [arXiv:1803.10780 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Malhotra, E

    A. Malhotra, E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello and M. Shiraishi, JCAP03, 088 (2021) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/03/088 [arXiv:2012.03498 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2021 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Multimessenger cosmology: Correlating cosmic microwave background and stochastic gravitational wave background measurements,

    P. Adshead, N. Afshordi, E. Dimastrogiovanni, M. Fasiello, E. A. Lim and G. Tasinato, “Multimessenger cosmology: Correlating cosmic microwave background and stochastic gravitational wave background measurements,” Phys. Rev. D103, no.2, 023532 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.02...

    2021 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Cross-Correlating Astrophysical and Cosmological Gravitational Wave Backgrounds with the Cosmic Microwave Background,

    A. Ricciardone, L. V. Dall’Armi, N. Bartolo, D. Bertacca, M. Liguori and S. Matarrese, “Cross-Correlating Astrophysical and Cosmological Gravitational Wave Backgrounds with the Cosmic Microwave Background,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127 (2021) no.27, 271301 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.2...

    2021 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Probing prerecombination physics by the cross-correlation of stochastic gravitational waves and CMB anisotropies,

    M. Braglia and S. Kuroyanagi, “Probing prerecombination physics by the cross-correlation of stochastic gravitational waves and CMB anisotropies,” Phys. Rev. D104, no.12, 123547 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.123547 [arXiv:2106.03786 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2021 arXiv

  18. [25]

    GW_CLASS: Cosmological Gravitational Wave Background in the Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System,

    F. Schulze, L. Valbusa Dall’Armi, J. Lesgourgues, A. Ricciardone, N. Bartolo, D. Bertacca, C. Fidler and S. Matarrese, “GW_CLASS: Cosmological Gravitational Wave Background in the Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System,” [arXiv:2305.01602 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv

  19. [26]

    Correlated scalar perturbations and gravitational waves from axion inflation,

    S. P. Corbà and L. Sorbo, "Correlated scalar perturbations and gravitational waves from axion inflation," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics , vol. 2024, no. 10, p. 024, Oct. 2024. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/10/024 [ arXiv:2403.03338 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Intrinsic Limits on the Detection of the Anisotropies of the Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background,

    G. Mentasti, C. R. Contaldi and M. Peloso, “Intrinsic Limits on the Detection of the Anisotropies of the Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131, no.22, 221403 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.221403 [arXiv:2301.08074 [gr-qc]]

    2023 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Unraveling cosmological anisotropies within stochastic gravitational wave backgrounds,

    Y. Cui, S. Kumar, R. Sundrum and Y. Tsai, “Unraveling cosmological anisotropies within stochastic gravitational wave backgrounds,” JCAP10, 064 (2023) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/10/064 [arXiv:2307.10360 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2023 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Anisotropies in the Gravitational Wave Background from Preheating,

    L. Bethke, D. G. Figueroa and A. Rajantie, “Anisotropies in the Gravitational Wave Background from Preheating,” Phys. Rev. Lett.111, no.1, 011301 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.011301 [arXiv:1304.2657 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2013 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Y. H. Yu and S. Wang, [arXiv:2504.07838 [astro-ph.CO]]

    arXiv

  24. [31]

    Bartolo, D

    N. Bartolo, D. Bertacca, S. Matarrese, M. Peloso, A. Ricciardone, A. Riotto and G. Tasinato, Phys. Rev. D100, no.12, 121501 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.121501 [arXiv:1908.00527 [astro-ph.CO]]. – 29 –

    2019 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Characterizing the cosmological gravitational wave background: Anisotropies and non-Gaussianity,

    N. Bartolo, D. Bertacca, S. Matarrese, M. Peloso, A. Ricciardone, A. Riotto and G. Tasinato, “Characterizing the cosmological gravitational wave background: Anisotropies and non-Gaussianity,” Phys. Rev. D102, no.2, 023527 (2020) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.023527 [arXiv:1912.0943...

    2020 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Numerical study of pseudoscalar inflation with an axion-gauge field coupling,

    S. L. Cheng, W. Lee and K. W. Ng, “Numerical study of pseudoscalar inflation with an axion-gauge field coupling,” Phys. Rev. D93, no. 6, 063510 (2016) [arXiv:1508.00251 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2016 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Dissipative Axial Inflation,

    A. Notari and K. Tywoniuk,“Dissipative Axial Inflation,” JCAP1612, 038 (2016) [arXiv:1608.06223 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Backreaction of electromagnetic fields and the Schwinger effect in pseudoscalar inflation magnetogenesis,

    O. O. Sobol, E. V. Gorbar and S. I. Vilchinskii, “Backreaction of electromagnetic fields and the Schwinger effect in pseudoscalar inflation magnetogenesis,” Phys. Rev. D100, no.6, 063523 (2019) [arXiv:1907.10443 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2019 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Warm dark energy,

    G. Dall’Agata, S. González-Martín, A. Papageorgiou and M. Peloso, “Warm dark energy,” JCAP 08, 032 (2020) [arXiv:1912.09950 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Resonant backreaction in axion inflation,

    V. Domcke, V. Guidetti, Y. Welling and A. Westphal, “Resonant backreaction in axion inflation,” JCAP 09, 009 (2020) [arXiv:2002.02952 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2020 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Lattice simulations of axion-U(1) inflation,

    A. Caravano, E. Komatsu, K. D. Lozanov and J. Weller, “Lattice simulations of axion-U(1) inflation,” Phys. Rev. D108, no.4, 043504 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.043504 [arXiv:2204.12874 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2023 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Instability in axion inflation with strong backreaction from gauge modes,

    M. Peloso and L. Sorbo, “Instability in axion inflation with strong backreaction from gauge modes,” JCAP 01, 038 (2023) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/01/038 [arXiv:2209.08131 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2023 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Strong Backreaction Regime in Axion Inflation,

    D. G. Figueroa, J. Lizarraga, A. Urio and J. Urrestilla, “Strong Backreaction Regime in Axion Inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131, no.15, 151003 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.151003 [arXiv:2303.17436 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Axion inflation in the strong-backreaction regime: decay of the Anber-Sorbo solution,

    R. von Eckardstein, M. Peloso, K. Schmitz, O. Sobol and L. Sorbo, “Axion inflation in the strong-backreaction regime: decay of the Anber-Sorbo solution,” JHEP11, 183 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2023)183 [arXiv:2309.04254 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Caravano and M

    A. Caravano and M. Peloso, [arXiv:2407.13405 [astro-ph.CO]]

    arXiv

  36. [44]

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

    J. M. Maldacena, “Non-Gaussian features of primordial fluctuations in single field inflationary models,” JHEP 05, 013 (2003) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/05/013 [arXiv:astro-ph/0210603 [astro-ph]]

    2003 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Phenomenology of a Pseudo-Scalar Inflaton: Naturally Large Nongaussianity,

    N. Barnaby, R. Namba and M. Peloso, “Phenomenology of a Pseudo-Scalar Inflaton: Naturally Large Nongaussianity,” JCAP04, 009 (2011) doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2011/04/009 [arXiv:1102.4333 [astro-ph.CO]]. – 30 –

    2011 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.