Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 55 references

The primordial angular power spectrum from the alternative mass function in loop quantum cosmology

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read One LQC mass function puts a wave packet in the primordial spectrum.

desk verdict A competent first computation of LQC alternative-mass-function spectra, with a genuinely new wave-packet feature, but the 'best fit' claim is under-supported and the work needs robustness checks before it is publishable. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.17554 v1 pith:OUKR72HZ submitted 2025-05-23 gr-qc

Abolhassan Mohammadi , Bao-Fei Li , Tao Zhu This is my paper
classification gr-qc
keywords loopquantumcosmologyprimordialpowerspectrumangularMukhanov-SasakiequationpolymerizationStarobinskypotentialbounceCMB
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 the freedom in choosing how the inverse Hubble rate is polymerized in loop quantum cosmology changes observable predictions for the early universe. Working with the alternative effective mass function built from the comoving-gauge classical mass function, the authors show that a single free parameter $\xi$ in the polymerization ansatz produces a new wave-packet structure in the primordial power spectrum once $\xi\gtrsim0.1$. The wave packet sits in the oscillatory region just before the almost scale-invariant plateau, and its position and height track $\xi$. Feeding these spectra into CMB angular-power calculations, the paper finds that $\xi=0.2$ gives the best match to the $\Lambda$CDM best-fit curve at low multipoles, while larger or negative $\xi$ deviates. The consequence is that the fine structure of the primordial spectrum, not just its overall amplitude, can carry information about the quantization ambiguities of loop quantum cosmology.

What carries the argument

The central object is the alternative effective mass function $m^2_{\mathrm{eff}} = \Omega^2 - a''/a$ for the modified Mukhanov-Sasaki equation, obtained by polymerizing the classical comoving-gauge mass function via the replacement $z_s \to a\dot{\phi}\sqrt{\rho_c-\rho}\,H^{-1} g(\rho)$. The paper chooses the one-parameter ansatz $g(\xi)= (1/\sqrt{\rho_c})(1+\xi\rho/\rho_c)$, which generates four correction terms $\delta_a,\delta_b,\delta_c,\delta_d$ in the effective potential. This function controls the shape of the effective mass near the bounce; at $\rho=\rho_c$ it reduces to $m^2_{\mathrm{eff}}\approx 8\pi G a^2\rho_c (5\xi-1)/(1+\xi)$, so whether the bounce point is a local minimum or maximum of the mass function, and hence whether the wave packet appears, depends on $\xi$. The machinery is what carries the argument: changing $\xi$ changes only the bounce-regime mass function, leaving the scale-invariant plateau and pivot scale nearly untouched, which is why the new observable structure is localized in the oscillatory region.

What would settle it

Compute the primordial power spectrum with the same effective-mass framework but a different admissible polymerization function $g(\rho)$ satisfying the stated boundary conditions: if the wave-packet structure for $\xi\gtrsim0.1$ disappears or moves, the feature is an artifact of the ansatz, not of the comoving-gauge mass function. Alternatively, a CMB measurement that resolves the low-multipole temperature spectrum and finds no dip below $\Lambda$CDM for $2\lesssim l\lesssim9$ would rule out the fitted $\xi=0.2$ case.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using the Starobinsky potential, a Bunch-Davies initial state in the contracting branch, and 68 inflationary e-foldings, the paper computes the primordial power spectrum from the modified Mukhanov-Sasaki equation with the alternative effective mass function $m^2_{\mathrm{eff}} = \Omega^2 - a''/a$. The spectrum has the usual infrared, oscillatory, and almost scale-invariant regimes, but for $\xi\geq0.1$ a wave-packet structure appears in the oscillatory region immediately preceding the plateau. The packet's height grows and its location shifts as $\xi$ increases; for $\xi\lesssim0.1$ the spectrum resembles the dressed metric and hybrid results. At the bounce the effective mass behaves as $m^2_{\mathrm{eff}} \approx 8\pi G a^2\rho_c (5\xi-1)/(1+\xi)$, so the sign and extrema of the mass near the bounce depend on $\xi$, which the authors suggest is connected to the appearance of the packet. For the angular power spectrum, $\xi=0.2$ lies below the $\Lambda$CDM best fit for $2<l<9$ and crosses it near $l\approx2$, giving the closest match to Planck-2018 low-multipole data among the values tested; the comoving pivot scale stays fixed to within 0.25% across $\xi$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the particular one-parameter polymerization ansatz for the inverse Hubble rate, $g(\xi) = (1/\sqrt{\rho_c})(1+\xi\rho/\rho_c)$, is the right way to implement the quantum correction; the paper does not derive this form from the quantum theory, and the wave-packet feature and the fitted value $\xi=0.2$ would change if another allowed $g(\rho)$ were chosen.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For $\xi\gtrsim0.1$, the primordial power spectrum acquires a wave-packet feature in the oscillatory region before the scale-invariant plateau, with height and location controlled by $\xi$.
  • The angular power spectrum at low multipoles ($l<10$) becomes a discriminating probe of the polymerization ansatz: $\xi=0.2$ best matches $\Lambda$CDM/Planck, while values farther from $\xi=0.2$ deviate increasingly.
  • The scale-invariant plateau and the pivot scale stay essentially fixed as $\xi$ varies (less than 0.25% change), so constraints from the CMB come from the pre-inflationary oscillatory sector, not from the overall amplitude.
  • The theoretical lower bound $\xi>-1$ is required for the correction terms to be regular at the bounce, and negative $\xi$ produces excess low-multipole power, disfavoring that branch.
  • Observational fits can in principle bound the polymerization parameter to $\xi\sim0.2$, providing an example of how CMB data can restrict quantization ambiguities in loop quantum cosmology.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the wave-packet structure is generic to the comoving-gauge polymerization rather than to the specific linear ansatz, the same feature should appear for other inflationary potentials; testing, say, a quadratic potential would show whether the packet's location tracks the potential or only $\xi$.
  • The fitted value $\xi=0.2$ sits exactly where $m^2_{\mathrm{eff}}$ at the bounce changes sign ($5\xi-1=0$), suggesting the wave-packet onset near $\xi\approx0.1$ may be tied to the qualitative shape of the bounce-regime potential rather than to the detailed form of $g$; this link could be checked by mapping the extrema of $m^2_{\mathrm{eff}}$ to the packet's appearance.
  • A future derivation of $g$ from full loop quantum gravity would turn the observational constraint $\xi\approx0.2$ into a test of that derivation: any proposed $g$ whose low-density limit or bounce value differs would predict a different low-multipole CMB spectrum.
  • The same mass function should also modify tensor perturbations; computing the tensor power spectrum and its B-mode signature would give an independent, falsifiable consequence of the $\xi=0.2$ fit.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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 studies cosmological perturbations in loop quantum cosmology using the alternative effective mass function obtained from polymerizing the comoving-gauge classical mass function. For the Starobinsky potential and the linear polymerization ansatz g(ξ) = (1/√ρ_c)(1 + ξρ/ρ_c) of Eq. (2.16), the authors numerically evolve the Mukhanov-Sasaki equation from Bunch-Davies initial conditions in the contracting branch and compute the primordial power spectrum, then feed the result to CAMB to obtain the CMB temperature angular power spectrum. They find the familiar three regimes (infrared, oscillatory, almost scale-invariant) and report a new wave-packet structure in the transition region for ξ ≥ 0.1, whose height and location depend on ξ. They further report that ξ = 0.2 gives the best agreement with the Planck 2018 low-multipole data among the tested values. The paper concludes that the fine structure of the primordial power spectrum depends sensitively on the polymerization parameters and that observations can restrict the viable range of ξ.

Significance. The paper addresses a genuine open question in loop quantum cosmology: whether different polymerization choices leave observable imprints in the primordial spectra. If the wave-packet feature is robust, it would discriminate the alternative mass function from the dressed-metric and hybrid approaches and provide a concrete example of how quantization ambiguities could be constrained by CMB observations. The numerical exploration is systematic in ξ and the three-regime structure is clearly presented. However, the significance is conditional: the wave packet appears only for ξ ≥ 0.1, ξ is introduced through an ad hoc ansatz rather than derived, and the claimed best fit is qualitative. The paper does not provide reproducibility artifacts such as code, a convergence study, or a statistical model comparison, so the credibility of the central claims rests entirely on the described numerical experiments.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III.A, Eq. (3.2) and Fig. 2] The central new signature, the wave-packet structure, is computed from modes initialized as the zeroth-order adiabatic Bunch-Davies vacuum (Eq. 3.2). The citation to Ref. [53] is used to argue that higher-order adiabatic states affect only the infrared and oscillatory modes with k ≲ O(0.01) and do not change the scale-invariant regime, but the wave packet lies precisely in the oscillatory/pre-scale-invariant transition and is sourced by the modes that produce the l < 10 angular spectrum in Sec. III.B. No test is presented with a fourth-order adiabatic initial state or with a different initial time. Without such a test, the attribution of the wave packet to the alternative mass function rather than to the initial-state prescription is not established.
  2. [Sec. II, Eq. (2.16)] All new features, including the wave packet and the preferred value ξ = 0.2, depend on the specific linear polymerization ansatz g(ξ) = (1/√ρ_c)(1 + ξρ/ρ_c) and on the truncation to first order in ξ. The ansatz is introduced as tentative and is not derived from the quantum theory, and no other admissible form of g(ρ) satisfying the boundary conditions in Eq. (2.9) is tested. The paper therefore demonstrates that a particular choice of polymerization can produce a wave packet, but it does not establish that the alternative mass function generically predicts one; a robustness study over admissible forms of g, or a derivation of Eq. (2.16), is required to support the headline claim.
  3. [Sec. III.B, Fig. 4] The statement that ξ = 0.2 provides the "best-fit curve" to the ΛCDM result is supported only by visual inspection. No chi-squared, likelihood, or other quantitative comparison with the Planck 2018 data or the ΛCDM model is given, and the visible differences occur only at l < 10, where cosmic variance is significant. A quantitative goodness-of-fit measure is needed to justify the claimed preference for ξ = 0.2 over neighboring values such as ξ = 0.01 and ξ = 0.5.
  4. [Sec. III.A, Figs. 1-2] No convergence or error analysis is reported for the numerical primordial power spectrum. The paper does not state the k-grid resolution, the time-step size, or how the results depend on the initial time t_i = -10^6, nor does it provide uncertainties for the location and height of the wave packet. Since the wave-packet structure is the primary new observable, a resolution study is required to rule out numerical artifacts before the feature can be attributed to the mass function.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. III.B] The text repeatedly says "multiples" where "multipoles" is meant, for example "for the multiples larger than l > 10"; this should be corrected throughout the section.
  2. [Fig. 2] Some axis tick labels appear garbled, such as "5 × 100 101 2 × 101"; the axes should use standard powers-of-ten notation so that the reader can read the k values of the wave-packet features.
  3. [Eq. (2.17)] The paper notes the condition ξ ≠ -1 but does not discuss the behavior for ξ < -1, where the correction terms can change sign or grow without bound; a brief comment on this regime would be helpful.
  4. [Abstract and Sec. IV] The abstract states that ξ = 0.2 provides the best-fit curve, while the conclusion says the preferred range is "around 0.2"; these statements should be made consistent, and the statistical meaning of "best-fit" should be clarified.
  5. [General] A data/code availability statement would improve reproducibility; the numerical pipeline (initial conditions, solver, CAMB interface) is described only narratively, and the absence of a convergence appendix makes it difficult for readers to assess the robustness of the reported spectra.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the wave-packet feature is a computed consequence of an explicitly stated free parameter, and the xi=0.2 angular match is labeled a best fit rather than a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The alternative effective mass function is fully displayed in Eqs. (2.10)-(2.16), including the polymerization ansatz g(xi) = (1/sqrt(rho_c))(1 + xi rho/rho_c) and the resulting correction terms, so the central input is stated openly rather than smuggled in. The wave-packet structure is then obtained by numerical evolution of the Mukhanov-Sasaki equation with specified background and Bunch-Davies initial conditions, and it appears only for xi >= 0.1. This is a parametric model prediction, not a quantity defined to be equal to its input by construction: the wave packet is not fitted to the angular data, and its location and height are emergent numerical outcomes. The angular power spectrum comparison is explicitly described as finding that xi = 0.2 provides the 'best-fit curve,' which is an honest parameter-scan result rather than a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The self-citations to Refs. [52] and [53] are used as sources for the mass function and for the insensitivity of the scale-invariant regime to higher-order adiabatic states, but the mass function is re-derived in the text and the initial-state robustness claim is not used to guarantee the new wave packet, which remains an untested robustness gap rather than a circular reduction. No Eq. X = Eq. Y by construction or fitted-input-called-prediction step can be exhibited, so the paper does not meet the threshold for circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on one ad hoc polymerization ansatz with a free parameter xi, plus two background parameters tuned to match observations. There are no new physical entities. The axioms are standard LQC assumptions and the specific potential choice.

free parameters (3)
  • xi = 0.2 (best fit to Lambda-CDM angular spectrum, but no formal fit)
    Free parameter controlling the polymerization ansatz; the wave-packet structure appears only for xi >= 0.1 and its size depends on xi.
  • inflaton mass m = 2.455 x 10^-6
    Chosen so that the amplitude of the scale-invariant spectrum matches the observed CMB pivot amplitude P_R(k*) = 2.0989 x 10^-9.
  • initial field value phi_B = -1.427
    Chosen to give 68 e-foldings of inflation.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Effective dynamics of LQC faithfully describe the quantum evolution from the bounce to inflation.
    Assumed throughout; the validity is supported by earlier numerical studies cited in Sec. II.
  • domain assumption The perturbation mode functions start in the Bunch-Davies vacuum in the contracting branch.
    Used for initial conditions in Sec. III; the paper notes higher-order adiabatic states would not affect the scale-invariant regime.
  • domain assumption The Starobinsky potential is the inflaton potential.
    A specific potential chosen for the computation; the results may depend on this choice.
  • ad hoc to paper The polymerization ansatz g(xi) = (1/sqrt(rho_c))(1 + xi rho/rho_c) and the truncation to first order in xi capture the relevant quantum effects.
    This is the key model choice from [52] and is not derived from first principles.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The primordial angular power spectrum from the alternative mass function in loop quantum cosmology." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OUKR72HZ

@misc{pith2026250517554,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The primordial angular power spectrum from the alternative mass function in loop quantum cosmology},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OUKR72HZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.17554}
}
abstract

We investigate the cosmological impacts of the alternative effective mass function of the modified Mukhanov-Sasaki equation in loop quantum cosmology, which is obtained from the polymerization of the classical mass function derived in the comoving gauge. This alternative effective mass function is distinct from those in the dressed metric and the hybrid approaches and is able to generate a new structure in the primordial power spectrum. After taking the Starobinsky potential and employing a particular polymerization ansatz for the inverse Hubble rate, the effective mass function is characterized by a free parameter $\xi$. When $\xi \ge 0.1$, there appears a wave-packet structure in the region preceding the almost scale invariant regime of the power spectrum and both the location and the height of the wave packet are affected by the choice of $\xi$. For the angular power spectrum, we find $\xi=0.2$ provides the best-fit curve to the result from the $\Lambda$CDM model. Our study presents a concrete example in which the fine structure of the primordial power spectrum sensitively relies on the parameters in the polymerization ansatz.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.17554 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. A representative example of the primordial power spectrum resulting from the effective mass function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The primordial power spectra resulting from the alternative mass function (2.10) and the polymer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. In this figure, we depict the effective mass function near the bounce point where several choices of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The numerical angular power spectra arising from the effective mass function (2.10) and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [53]

    B.-F. Li, M. Motaharfar, and P. Singh,Constraining regularization ambiguities in loop quantum cos- mology via CMB, Phys. Rev. D110, 066005 (2024), arXiv:2405.12296

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Borde, A

    A. Borde, A. H. Guth, and A. Vilenkin,Inflationary space-times are incompletein past directions, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 151301 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0110012

    arXiv 2003

  3. [2]

    S. W. Hawking and G. F. Ellis,The large scale structure of space-time(Cambridge university press, 2023)

    2023

  4. [3]

    Ashtekar and P

    A. Ashtekar and P. Singh,Loop Quantum Cosmology: A Status Report, Class. Quant. Grav.28, 213001 (2011), arXiv:1108.0893

    arXiv 2011

  5. [4]

    Li and P

    B.-F. Li and P. Singh,Loop Quantum Cosmology: Physics of Singularity Resolution and Its Implications (2024), arXiv:2304.05426

    arXiv 2024

  6. [5]

    Thiemann,Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity,Cambridge Monographs on Mathemat- ical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2007)

    T. Thiemann,Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity,Cambridge Monographs on Mathemat- ical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2007)

    work page 2007

  7. [6]

    Ashtekar, T

    A. Ashtekar, T. Pawlowski, and P. Singh,Quantum Nature of the Big Bang: Improved dynamics, Phys. Rev. D74, 084003 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0607039

    arXiv 2006

  8. [7]

    Ashtekar, A

    A. Ashtekar, A. Corichi, and P. Singh,Robustness of key features of loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D77, 024046 (2008), arXiv:0710.3565

    arXiv 2008

Show all 55 references
  1. [8]

    Singh,Are loop quantum cosmos never singular?, Class

    P. Singh,Are loop quantum cosmos never singular?, Class. Quant. Grav.26, 125005 (2009), arXiv:0901.2750

    2009 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Singh,Curvature invariants, geodesics, and the strength of singularities in Bianchi-I loop quantum cosmology, Phys

    P. Singh,Curvature invariants, geodesics, and the strength of singularities in Bianchi-I loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D85, 104011 (2012)

    2012

  3. [10]

    Singh,Loop quantum cosmology and the fate of cosmological singularities, arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.09182 (2015)

    P. Singh,Loop quantum cosmology and the fate of cosmological singularities, arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.09182 (2015)

    2015 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Saini and P

    S. Saini and P. Singh,Generic absence of strong singularities in loop quantum Bianchi-IX spacetimes, Classical and Quantum Gravity35, 065014 (2018)

    2018

  5. [12]

    Saini and P

    S. Saini and P. Singh,Resolution of strong singularities and geodesic completeness in loop quantum Bianchi-II spacetimes, Classical and Quantum Gravity34, 235006 (2017)

    2017

  6. [13]

    Taveras,Corrections to the Friedmann Equations from LQG for a Universe with a Free Scalar Field, Phys

    V. Taveras,Corrections to the Friedmann Equations from LQG for a Universe with a Free Scalar Field, Phys. Rev. D78, 064072 (2008), arXiv:0807.3325

    2008 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Diener, B

    P. Diener, B. Gupt, and P. Singh,Numerical simulations of a loop quantum cosmos: robustness of the quantum bounce and the validity of effective dynamics, Class. Quant. Grav.31, 105015 (2014), arXiv:1402.6613

    2014 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Diener, B

    P. Diener, B. Gupt, M. Megevand, and P. Singh,Numerical evolution of squeezed and non-Gaussian states in loop quantum cosmology, Class. Quant. Grav.31, 165006 (2014), arXiv:1406.1486

    2014 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Diener, A

    P. Diener, A. Joe, M. Megevand, and P. Singh,Numerical simulations of loop quantum Bianchi-I spacetimes, Class. Quant. Grav.34, 094004 (2017), arXiv:1701.05824

    2017 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Singh,Glimpses of Space-Time Beyond the Singularities Using Supercomputers, Comput

    P. Singh,Glimpses of Space-Time Beyond the Singularities Using Supercomputers, Comput. Sci. Eng. 20, 26 (2018), arXiv:1809.01747

    2018 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Singh, K

    P. Singh, K. Vandersloot, and G. V. Vereshchagin, Non-singular bouncing universes in loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D74, 043510 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0606032

    2006 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Mielczarek, T

    J. Mielczarek, T. Cailleteau, J. Grain, and A. Barrau,Inflation in loop quantum cosmology: dynamics and spectrum of gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. D81, 104049 (2010), arXiv:1003.4660

    2010 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Ashtekar and D

    A. Ashtekar and D. Sloan,Probability of Inflation in Loop Quantum Cosmology, Gen. Rel. Grav.43, 3619 (2011), arXiv:1103.2475

    2011 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Linsefors and A

    L. Linsefors and A. Barrau,Duration of inflation and conditions at the bounce as a prediction of effective isotropic loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D87, 123509 (2013), arXiv:1301.1264

    2013 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Corichi and D

    A. Corichi and D. Sloan, Inflationary Attractors and their Measures, Class. Quant. Grav.31, 062001 (2014), arXiv:1310.6399

    2014 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Bonga and B

    B. Bonga and B. Gupt,Inflation with the Starobinsky potential in Loop Quantum Cosmology, Gen. Rel. Grav.48, 71 (2016), arXiv:1510.00680

    2016 arXiv

  17. [24]

    T. Zhu, A. Wang, G. Cleaver, K. Kirsten, and Q. Sheng,Pre-inflationary universe in loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D96, 083520 (2017), arXiv:1705.07544. 13

    2017 arXiv

  18. [25]

    B.-F. Li, S. Saini, and P. Singh,Primordial power spectrum from a matter-Ekpyrotic bounce scenario in loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D103, 066020 (2021), arXiv:2012.10462

    2021 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Giesel, B.-F

    K. Giesel, B.-F. Li, and P. Singh,Towards a reduced phase space quantization in loop quantum cosmology with an inflationary potential, Phys. Rev. D102, 126024 (2020), arXiv:2007.06597

    2020 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Motaharfar and P

    M. Motaharfar and P. Singh,Role of dissipative effects in the quantum gravitational onset of warm Starobinsky inflation in a closed universe, Phys. Rev. D104, 106006 (2021), arXiv:2102.09578

    2021 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Sharma, T

    M. Sharma, T. Zhu, and A. Wang, Background dynamics of pre-inflationary scenario in Brans-Dicke loop quantum cosmology, Commun. Theor. Phys.71, 1205 (2019), arXiv:1903.07382

    2019 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Q. Wu, T. Zhu, and A. Wang,Nonadiabatic evolution of primordial perturbations and non-Gaussinity in hybrid approach of loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D98, 103528 (2018), arXiv:1809.03172

    2018 arXiv

  23. [30]

    W.-J. Jin, Y. Ma, and T. Zhu, Pre-inflationary dynamics of Starobinsky inflation and its generization in Loop Quantum Brans-Dicke Cosmology, JCAP02, 010 (2019), arXiv:1808.09643

    2019 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Zhuet al., Scalar and tensor perturbations in loop quantum cosmology: High-order corrections, JCAP10, 052 (2015), arXiv:1508.03239

    T. Zhuet al., Scalar and tensor perturbations in loop quantum cosmology: High-order corrections, JCAP10, 052 (2015), arXiv:1508.03239

    2015 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Zhuet al., Detecting quantum gravitational effects of loop quantum cosmology in the early universe?, Astrophys

    T. Zhuet al., Detecting quantum gravitational effects of loop quantum cosmology in the early universe?, Astrophys. J. Lett.807, L17 (2015), arXiv:1503.06761

    2015 arXiv

  26. [33]

    T. Zhuet al., Inflationary spectra with inverse-volume corrections in loop quantum cosmology and their observational constraints from Planck 2015 data, JCAP03, 046 (2016), arXiv:1510.03855

    2016 arXiv

  27. [34]

    T. Zhu, A. Wang, K. Kirsten, G. Cleaver, and Q. Sheng, Universal features of quantum bounce in loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Lett. B773, 196 (2017), arXiv:1607.06329

    2017 arXiv

  28. [35]

    T. Zhu, A. Wang, K. Kirsten, G. Cleaver, and Q. Sheng,Primordial non-Gaussianity and power asymmetry with quantum gravitational effects in loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D97, 043501 (2018), arXiv:1709.07479

    2018 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Liet al.,Preinflationary perturbations from the closed algebra approach in loop quantum cosmol- ogy, Phys

    B.-F. Liet al.,Preinflationary perturbations from the closed algebra approach in loop quantum cosmol- ogy, Phys. Rev. D99, 103536 (2019), arXiv:1812.11191

    2019 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Agullo, A

    I. Agullo, A. Ashtekar, and W. Nelson,A Quantum Gravity Extension of the Inflationary Scenario, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 251301 (2012), arXiv:1209.1609

    2012 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Agullo, A

    I. Agullo, A. Ashtekar, and W. Nelson,Extension of the quantum theory of cosmological perturbations to the Planck era, Phys. Rev. D87, 043507 (2013), arXiv:1211.1354

    2013 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Agullo, A

    I. Agullo, A. Ashtekar, and W. Nelson,The pre-inflationary dynamics of loop quantum cosmology: Con- fronting quantum gravity with observations, Class. Quant. Grav.30, 085014 (2013), arXiv:1302.0254

    2013 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Fernandez-Mendez, G

    M. Fernandez-Mendez, G. A. Mena Marugan, and J. Olmedo,Hybrid quantization of an inflationary universe, Phys. Rev. D86, 024003 (2012), arXiv:1205.1917

    2012 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Fern´ andez-M´ endez, G

    M. Fern´ andez-M´ endez, G. A. Mena Marug´ an, and J. Olmedo,Hybrid quantization of an inflationary model: The flat case, Phys. Rev. D88, 044013 (2013), arXiv:1307.5222

    2013 arXiv

  35. [42]

    L. C. Gomar, M. Fern´ andez-M´ endez, G. A. M. Marug´ an, and J. Olmedo,Cosmological perturbations in Hybrid Loop Quantum Cosmology: Mukhanov-Sasaki variables, Phys. Rev. D90, 064015 (2014), arXiv:1407.0998

    2014 arXiv

  36. [43]

    L. C. Gomar, M. Mart ´ ın-Benito, and G. A. M. Marug´ an,Gauge-Invariant Perturbations in Hybrid Quantum Cosmology, JCAP06, 045 (2015), arXiv:1503.03907

    2015 arXiv

  37. [44]

    F. B. Mart ´ ınez and J. Olmedo,Primordial tensor modes of the early Universe, Phys. Rev. D93, 124008 (2016), arXiv:1605.04293

    2016 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Elizaga Navascu´ es and G

    B. Elizaga Navascu´ es and G. A. M. Marug´ an,Hybrid Loop Quantum Cosmology: An Overview, Front. Astron. Space Sci.8, 81 (2021), arXiv:2011.04559

    2021 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Bojowald, G

    M. Bojowald, G. M. Hossain, M. Kagan, and S. Shankaranarayanan,Anomaly freedom in perturbative loop quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D78, 063547 (2008), arXiv:0806.3929

    2008 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Cailleteau, A

    T. Cailleteau, A. Barrau, J. Grain, and F. Vidotto,Consistency of holonomy-corrected scalar, vector and tensor perturbations in Loop Quantum Cosmology, Phys. Rev. D86, 087301 (2012), arXiv:1206.6736

    2012 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Cailleteau, J

    T. Cailleteau, J. Mielczarek, A. Barrau, and J. Grain,Anomaly-free scalar perturbations with holonomy corrections in loop quantum cosmology, Class. Quant. Grav.29, 095010 (2012), arXiv:1111.3535

    2012 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Wilson-Ewing,Separate universes in loop quantum cosmology: framework and applications, Int

    E. Wilson-Ewing,Separate universes in loop quantum cosmology: framework and applications, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D25, 1642002 (2016), arXiv:1512.05743

    2016 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Iteanu and G

    S. Iteanu and G. A. Mena Marug´ an,Mass of Cosmological Perturbations in the Hybrid and Dressed Metric Formalisms of Loop Quantum Cosmology for the Starobinsky and Exponential Potentials, Uni- verse8, 463 (2022), arXiv:2208.01987. 14

    2022 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Li and P

    B.-F. Li and P. Singh,Close relationship between the dressed metric and the hybrid approach to per- turbations in effective loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D106, 086015 (2022), arXiv:2206.12434

    2022 arXiv

  45. [52]

    Li and P

    B.-F. Li and P. Singh,Alternative effective mass functions in the modified Mukhanov-Sasaki equation of loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D109, 066005 (2024), arXiv:2310.18408

    2024 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Akramiet al.,Planck 2018 results

    Planck, Y. Akramiet al.,Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation, Astron. Astrophys.641, A10 (2020), arXiv:1807.06211

    2020 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Aghanimet al., Planck 2018 results

    Planck, N. Aghanimet al., Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020), arXiv:1807.06209, [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

    2020 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.