REVIEW 3 cited by
How Well Do We Know the Scalar-Induced Gravitational Waves?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
Gravitational waves sourced by amplified scalar perturbations are a common prediction across a wide range of cosmological models. These scalar curvature fluctuations are inherently nonlinear and typically non-Gaussian. We argue that the effects of non-Gaussianity may not always be adequately captured by an expansion around a Gaussian field, expressed through nonlinear parameters such as $f_{\rm{NL}}$. As a consequence, the resulting amplitude of the stochastic gravitational wave background may differ significantly from predictions based on the standard quadratic source model routinely used in the literature.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
A non-perturbative framework for N-point functions of locally non-Gaussian fields
N-point functions of locally non-Gaussian fields can be expanded in powers of the Gaussian correlation function using the Kibble-Slepian decomposition, with coefficients from one-point integrals; for an exponential-ta...
-
Implications for Pulsar Timing Arrays of Sub-solar Black Hole Detections: From LVK to Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer
A Bayesian analysis shows that a future sub-solar PBH detection would make the primordial SIGW interpretation of PTA data favored over the SMBH interpretation, but this preference is driven by the detection prior.
-
One-loop corrections to the E-type $\alpha$-attractor models of inflation and primordial black hole production
For E-type alpha-attractor inflation models tuned to produce asteroid-mass primordial black holes, the one-loop correction from cubic interactions is only a few percent of the tree-level power spectrum.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.