Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Perturbative Dissipation in Minimal Warm Inflation

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Perturbative drag in minimal warm inflation is too weak to matter.

desk verdict A genuinely useful CPT argument plus a new γ3 calculation, but the headline α-linear scaling is not supportable from the printed integral reduction; still worth a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08345 v1 pith:T3UJVUNU submitted 2026-08-08 hep-ph gr-qchep-th

Daniel J. H. Chung , Nidhi Sudhir , Lian-Tao Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phgr-qchep-th
keywords warminflationaxion-inflatondissipationcoefficientLandaudampingplasmondecayhardthermalloopsmagneticmasssphalerondiffusion
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 ordinary perturbative gluon processes can dissipate the inflaton's motion in the minimal warm inflation model, where an axion-like inflaton couples to a thermal gluon bath through $\phi \tilde G G / f$. It argues they cannot: the leading perturbative dissipative effect is a coefficient $\gamma_3$ multiplying $\dddot{\phi}$, not a velocity-friction $\gamma_1 \dot{\phi}$, and the $\dddot{\phi}$ term is slow-roll suppressed. On a slow-roll background satisfying $H \ll \alpha^2 T$, the perturbative contribution is at least $10^{-6}$ times smaller than the non-perturbative sphaleron (Chern-Simons diffusion) friction, so strong warm inflation in this model must rely on the sphaleron term. The paper also gives a symmetry reason why: for derivative couplings $\phi\,\partial_\mu J^\mu$, local perturbative physics cannot generate a $\dot{\phi}$ friction; only nonlocal, diffusively supported correlations such as those of Chern-Simons charge can.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the retarded thermal correlator of $\tilde G G$ at zero spatial momentum, reduced to an integral over the transverse gluon spectral density $\rho_T(q_0,q)$ (eqs. 4.19, 6.1-6.2). The dissipative coefficient is the third zero-frequency derivative of the spectral function, $\gamma_3\propto \partial^3_{p_0}\rho_{\tilde GG}(p_0,0)|_{p_0=0}$. The two physical contributions are Landau damping, where soft spacelike gluons with $|q_0|<q$ exchange energy with hard plasma modes, and plasmon decay, where near-on-shell gluons with a thermal mass decay at a rate $\gamma\sim \alpha N_c T \ln(m_D/m_g)$. Both are computed with hard-thermal-loop resummed propagators in the momentum window $(\alpha T, T)$ and are cut off in the infrared by the assumed magnetic mass $m_g\sim g^2 T$. A separate CPT argument shows why $\gamma_1$ vanishes perturbatively for derivative couplings $\phi\,\partial_\mu J^\mu$: it is a boundary term of the commutator $\langle [\int d^3x\, J^0, J^0]\rangle$, which vanishes when correlations decay at large time separation, whereas $\gamma_3$ samples the correlator near zero time separation and survives.

What would settle it

A lattice or other first-principles computation of the transverse gluon spectral function $\rho_T(q_0,q)$ at soft momenta $q\sim g^2 T$ would settle the central claim: if the low-frequency integral $I_l$ does not scale as $m_D^2/m_g^2$, so that $\Gamma_{\rm pert}$ is not linear in $\alpha$, the estimate (6.10) fails. A precision determination of the magnetic screening mass with a coefficient substantially different from unity would also rescale the claimed coefficient by an order-one-or-larger factor.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the leading perturbative dissipative term in the minimal warm inflation model is not a velocity-friction $\gamma_1 \dot{\phi}$ but a triple-derivative term $\gamma_3 \dddot{\phi}$, with coefficient roughly $\Gamma_{\rm pert} = -\frac{\alpha}{4\pi^2}\frac{T}{f^2}\frac{N_c^2-1}{24}\left[\frac{1}{N_c}\ln(m_D/m_g)+O(1)\frac{N_c}{4\pi^2}\right]$ (eq. 6.10). This coefficient is dominated by Landau damping of soft spacelike gluons and by plasmon decay of hard on-shell gluons, both infrared-dominated processes whose sensitivity to the non-perturbative magnetic mass $m_g\sim g^2 T$ turns the naive $\alpha^2$ suppression into a linear $\alpha$ scaling. Nevertheless, on a slow-roll background $\dddot{\phi}$ is suppressed by two powers of slow-roll parameters relative to $H^2\dot{\phi}$, and under the localization condition $H\ll\alpha^2 T$ the perturbative contribution is at least $10^{-6}$ smaller than the sphaleron friction. The paper concludes that perturbative dissipation therefore cannot drive strong warm inflation in this model, and that only non-perturbative diffusion can generate the $\dot{\phi}$ friction.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical result rests on treating the non-perturbative magnetic mass $m_g\sim g^2 T$ as the infrared cutoff in the Landau-damping integral; if that scale or its order-one coefficient differs, the size of $\Gamma_{\rm pert}$ changes, though the slow-roll suppression and subdominance would likely remain.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the slow-roll regime with $H\ll\alpha^2 T$, the total friction in minimal warm inflation is the sphaleron term; the perturbative term changes it by at most a part in $10^6$.
  • Any local perturbative computation with a derivative coupling $\phi\,\partial_\mu J^\mu$ should produce $\gamma_3$-type terms rather than $\gamma_1$; the earlier $\gamma_1$ result in [15] is traced to an error in distributing derivatives.
  • The perturbative friction coefficient scales linearly in $\alpha$ rather than $\alpha^2$ or $\alpha^5$, an infrared enhancement from the magnetic mass scale that is nevertheless not enough to overcome slow-roll suppression.
  • If the localization bound $H\ll\alpha^2 T$ is relaxed or the background is not slowly rolling, the perturbative term could become significant; computing that regime requires the full nonlocal dissipation kernel.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The vanishing of $\gamma_1$ for local perturbative correlations is general: any warm-inflation model with a derivatively coupled scalar and locally decaying thermal correlators needs non-perturbative or diffusive dynamics to obtain a velocity friction at leading order.
  • The numerical coefficient of $\Gamma_{\rm pert}$ is controlled by the assumed magnetic mass; a non-perturbative determination of $m_g$ and of the soft transverse gluon spectral function would turn the order-of-magnitude estimate (6.10) into a precise prediction.
  • Adding vectorlike fermions is a concrete way to test the model's balance: fermions suppress sphaleron friction and are expected to boost perturbative dissipation, potentially reversing the hierarchy in a regime the paper leaves open.
  • The $\gamma_3$ term could be searched for through its effect on the warm-inflation power spectrum in fast-roll or non-thermalizing backgrounds, where the present slow-roll suppression does not apply.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper analyzes perturbative dissipation in the minimal warm inflation (MWI) model with the axion-gauge coupling α φ G\tilde G /(16π f). Working in linear response and with HTL-resummed transverse gluon spectral functions, the authors find that the leading perturbative dissipative term in the background inflaton equation of motion is a triple-derivative coefficient Γ_pert multiplying \dddot φ, not a velocity friction γ_1 \dot φ. They estimate Γ_pert from Landau damping of soft spacelike gluons and plasmon decay of hard gluons, find it proportional to α, and conclude that it is slow-roll suppressed and subdominant to the sphaleron-generated friction by at least ~10^-6 for H ≪ α^2 T. Section 2 provides a general CPT/locality argument explaining why γ_1 requires nonlocal diffusive correlations.

Significance. If the central estimate can be made fully reproducible, the paper makes a useful and nontrivial contribution: it identifies the operator structure of perturbative dissipation in MWI, explains on general grounds why a velocity-proportional friction is absent for derivatively coupled axions at leading perturbative order, and sharpens the case that strong warm inflation in MWI must be driven by the non-perturbative sphaleron term. The paper is transparent about the status of its inputs: Section 6 labels the result as an order-of-magnitude estimate, Section 5.1 states that the magnetic mass m_g ~ g^2 T is assumed rather than computed, and Appendix A explicitly labels the competing scattering contribution as speculation. The symmetry argument in Section 2 is, to this referee, the most generally useful part of the paper. These strengths are real, but they do not remove the need to show the Landau damping integral explicitly.

major comments (3)
  1. The reduction from Eq. (6.6) to Eq. (6.8) is not shown and, as printed, does not go through. After the approximation n_B(q0)(1+n_B(q0)) ≈ (T/q0)^2 stated in Eq. (6.7), the displayed integrand contains no compensating power of q0 in the numerator; the q0 integral is therefore singular at q0 = 0. Substituting Eq. (5.6) into Eq. (6.5) gives Im Π_T ∝ (m_D^2/4)(1 − q0^2/q^2) q0/q, so the numerator in [Z_<]^2 should contain an additional factor q0/q (up to how the prefactor is absorbed). With that factor the Bose divergence is canceled and the claimed I_l ~ (T^2/8π) m_D^2/m_g^2 becomes plausible; with the printed q^2 − q0^2 numerator the integral behaves differently. Because Eq. (6.10) and the numerical ratio Eq. (6.23) inherit this reduction, the central α-linear scaling and the O(10^-5) suppression are not currently supported by the displayed computation. This is the load-bearing step and must be presented in full.
  2. The step from the HTL-resummed spectral function to the simplified Z_< used in Eq. (6.6) drops the factor (1 − q0^2/q^2) in the imaginary part and replaces Re Π_T by q^2 + m_D^2 q0^2/q^2 without stating the range of validity. Since the q0 integration extends over |q0| < q and q is integrated to infinity, the Bose approximation in Eq. (6.7) is only justified after restricting to q ≪ T. The authors should specify the integration regions and justify the approximations before they are used, not after.
  3. The quantitative comparison Γ_eff,p/Γ_eff,np ≈ (H^2/(α^4 T^2)) s(ϵ_v, η_v) O(10^-5) uses the numerical coefficient that depends on the problematic I_l and on the assumed normalization of m_g. If m_g = c g^2 T with c not of order one, the prefactor shifts by c^-2 and by a logarithm, although the slow-roll suppression and subdominance would likely survive. The paper should state this c-dependence explicitly as part of its error budget.
minor comments (4)
  1. The plasmon width γ(q) is quoted from the literature for hard modes q ~ T, but it is used in Eq. (6.9) in an integral over all q; please state the assumed q-dependence and its range of validity.
  2. The phrase "the dip ... passes through a zero" should be reworded for clarity; it is the function s(ϵ_v, η_v) that passes through zero, not the dip itself.
  3. Reference [26] is cited by arXiv number only; please update with the journal reference if one exists.
  4. The minus sign in Eq. (6.10) is absorbed into the sign of s(ϵ_v, η_v) in Eq. (6.16); a one-sentence sign-convention note would help the reader.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the perturbative dissipation coefficient is computed from independent HTL spectral inputs and external sphaleron rate, not from the target result.

full rationale

The paper's central claim — that the perturbative friction term is a triple-derivative coefficient Gamma_pert, subdominant to the sphaleron contribution — is derived from retarded gluon spectral functions using the HTL self-energy of eq. (5.1) and the cited plasmon decay rate of eq. (5.5), both external to this paper. The magnetic mass m_g ~ g^2 T is introduced as an IR cutoff on explicit physical grounds (3D confinement / lattice results) and is not fitted to Gamma_pert; changing its O(1) coefficient changes the numerical size but not the claimed scaling or the subdominance conclusion, so it is an assumption rather than a circular input. The sphaleron rate in eq. (6.15) is imported from prior lattice/EFT work and is independent of the perturbative calculation. The slow-roll conversion ...phi = -s H^2 phidot is computed in Appendix D assuming Gamma_eff is dominated by Gamma_sphal, but this is applied only after Gamma_pert has already been computed, and the final result verifies Gamma_pert is small, so there is no feedback of the target result into its own derivation. The authors' self-citations are not load-bearing: the cited prior work by others supplies the model definition and the sphaleron rate, not the uniqueness or correctness of the present perturbative computation. The skeptic's concern that eq. (6.8) does not follow from the printed integrand of eq. (6.6) is an internal-consistency or correctness issue, not circularity: even if the displayed reduction is wrong, the target coefficient is not defined in terms of itself or forced by a fit. No step reduces to its inputs by construction, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result relies on four main assumptions beyond standard thermal field theory: near-equilibrium and Markovian evolution, the existence and value of the magnetic mass scale, the fall-off of local correlators, and the slow-roll relation. No free parameters are fitted to the target result; m_g is the only scale chosen by hand, and the paper's abstract and text disagree on its parametric definition. There are no invented entities.

free parameters (1)
  • non-perturbative magnetic mass m_g = ~g^2 T (or alpha T in the abstract)
    Acts as the IR cutoff in the Landau damping integral, eq. (6.6). The result I_l approximately (T^2/8 pi) m_D^2/m_g^2 follows only if the integral is cut off at this scale; m_g is not computed here, and the abstract and text differ on its parametric definition.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The thermal bath remains close to equilibrium with H << alpha^2 T, allowing linear response and a local or Markovian approximation.
    Used in Section 3 (eq. 3.5) to expand the background and truncate at the third-derivative term; if violated, nonlocal dissipation kernels are needed.
  • domain assumption A non-perturbative magnetic mass m_g ~ g^2 T exists and acts as an IR cutoff in the transverse gluon sector.
    Assumed in Section 5.1 based on 3D confinement and lattice work; the Landau damping integral is IR divergent without it.
  • domain assumption Local perturbative correlators fall off at large time separations, so Y(-infinity) = 0 in the gamma_1 argument.
    Section 2.2, eqs. (2.33) to (2.39); this assumption is what makes gamma_1 vanish for derivative couplings.
  • standard math Standard HTL-resummed thermal field theory is valid in the momentum range (alpha T, T) and gives order-one accuracy for the spectral densities.
    Sections 4 to 6; the paper explicitly calls the Landau damping estimate order-of-magnitude and accurate only up to order-one factors.
  • domain assumption The slow-roll relation triple-derivative phi = -s(epsilon_v, eta_v) H^2 dot-phi holds, with s computed assuming Gamma_eff is dominated by Gamma_sphal.
    Appendix D, eq. (D.11); used to convert the gamma_3 term into an effective friction coefficient, and the self-consistency of assuming sphaleron dominance is only checked after the fact.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Perturbative Dissipation in Minimal Warm Inflation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/T3UJVUNU

@misc{pith2026260808345,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Perturbative Dissipation in Minimal Warm Inflation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/T3UJVUNU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08345}
}
abstract

We present an analysis of the perturbative modes of dissipation in the minimal warm inflation model where an axion-inflaton is coupled to a gluon thermal bath through the axion-gauge coupling. The corresponding friction coefficient, which generically is governed by IR physics, for the processes we consider is dominated by Landau damping of soft space-like gluons and the plasmon decay of hard on shell gluons. Since both of these processes are IR dominated, the friction coefficient becomes sensitive to the non-perturbative magnetic mass scale $m_{g}^{-1} \sim (\alpha T)^{-1}$ which in turn leads to the friction coefficient's overall linear proportionality to $\alpha$, which is much less suppressed in $\alpha$ powers compared to the well understood term from Chern-Simons (CS) diffusion $(\propto \alpha^5)$. On the other hand, this contribution to the friction coefficient is suppressed due to slow roll. We show that this can be viewed as a suppression of local spontaneous CPT violation for derivative couplings in general and that time correlations of nonlocal variables which do not fall off at large time separations are what allow an unsuppressed friction coefficient.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [26]

    Broadberry, A

    E. Broadberry, A. Hook and S. Mondal,Warm inflation with pseudo-scalar couplings, 2505.07943

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    Guth,The inflationary universe: A possible solution to the horizon and flatness problems,Phys

    A.H. Guth,The inflationary universe: A possible solution to the horizon and flatness problems,Phys. Rev. D23(1981) 347

    work page 1981

  3. [2]

    Linde,A new inflationary universe scenario: A possible solution of the horizon, flatness, homogeneity, isotropy and primordial monopole problems,Phys

    A.D. Linde,A new inflationary universe scenario: A possible solution of the horizon, flatness, homogeneity, isotropy and primordial monopole problems,Phys. Lett. B108(1982) 389

    work page 1982

  4. [3]

    Berera,Warm inflation,Phys

    A. Berera,Warm inflation,Phys. Rev. Lett.75(1995) 3218 [astro-ph/9509049]

    arXiv 1995

  5. [4]

    Berera and L.-Z

    A. Berera and L.-Z. Fang,Thermally induced density perturbations in the inflation era,Phys. Rev. Lett.74(1995) 1912 [astro-ph/9501024]

    arXiv 1995

  6. [5]

    Berera,Thermal properties of an inflationary universe,Phys

    A. Berera,Thermal properties of an inflationary universe,Phys. Rev. D54(1996) 2519 [hep-th/9601134]

    arXiv 1996

  7. [6]

    Berera,Warm inflation at arbitrary adiabaticity: a model, an existence proof for inflationary dynamics in quantum field theory,Nucl

    A. Berera,Warm inflation at arbitrary adiabaticity: a model, an existence proof for inflationary dynamics in quantum field theory,Nucl. Phys. B585(2000) 666 [hep-ph/9904409]

    arXiv 2000

  8. [7]

    Kamali, M

    V. Kamali, M. Motaharfar and R.O. Ramos,Recent developments in warm inflation, Universe9(2023) 124 [2302.02827]

    arXiv 2023

Show all 55 references
  1. [8]

    Yokoyama and A.D

    J. Yokoyama and A.D. Linde,Is warm inflation possible?,Phys. Rev. D60(1999) 083509 [hep-ph/9809409]

    1999 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, R.O. Ramos and J.a.G. Rosa,Warm little inflaton,Phys. Rev. Lett.117(2016) 151301 [1604.08838]

    2016 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Bastero-Gil and A

    M. Bastero-Gil and A. Berera,Warm inflation model building,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A24 (2009) 2207 [0902.0521]

    2009 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, R.O. Ramos and J.a.G. Rosa,Towards a reliable effective field theory of inflation,Phys. Lett. B813(2021) 136055 [1907.13410]

    2021 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Moss and C

    I.G. Moss and C. Xiong,Dissipation coefficients for supersymmetric inflatonary models, hep-ph/0603266

    arXiv

  6. [13]

    Berera and R.O

    A. Berera and R.O. Ramos,Construction of a robust warm inflation mechanism,Phys. Lett. B567(2003) 294 [hep-ph/0210301]

    2003 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Visinelli,Natural warm inflation,JCAP09(2011) 013 [1107.3523]

    L. Visinelli,Natural warm inflation,JCAP09(2011) 013 [1107.3523]

    2011 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Mishra, S

    H. Mishra, S. Mohanty and A. Nautiyal,Warm natural inflation,Phys. Lett. B710(2012) 245 [1106.3039]

    2012 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Kamali,Warm pseudoscalar inflation,Phys

    V. Kamali,Warm pseudoscalar inflation,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 043520 [1901.01897]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Ferreira and A

    R.Z. Ferreira and A. Notari,Thermalized axion inflation,JCAP09(2017) 007 [1706.00373]

    2017 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Berghaus, P.W

    K.V. Berghaus, P.W. Graham and D.E. Kaplan,Minimal warm inflation,JCAP03(2020) 034 [1910.07525]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Laine and S

    M. Laine and S. Procacci,Minimal warm inflation with complete medium response,JCAP 06(2021) 031 [2102.09913]

    2021 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Gross, R.D

    D.J. Gross, R.D. Pisarski and L.G. Yaffe,Qcd and instantons at finite temperature,Rev. Mod. Phys.53(1981) 43. – 43 –

    1981

  14. [21]

    Frison, R

    J. Frison, R. Kitano, H. Matsufuru, S. Mori and N. Yamada,Topological susceptibility at high temperature on the lattice,JHEP09(2016) 021 [1606.07175]

    2016 arXiv

  15. [22]

    McLerran, E

    L.D. McLerran, E. Mottola and M.E. Shaposhnikov,Sphalerons and axion dynamics in high temperature QCD,Phys. Rev. D43(1991) 2027

    1991

  16. [23]

    Moore and M

    G.D. Moore and M. Tassler,The sphaleron rate in SU(n) gauge theory,JHEP02(2011) 105 [1011.1167]

    2011 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Arnold and L

    P.B. Arnold and L. McLerran,Sphalerons, small fluctuations, and baryon number violation in electroweak theory,Phys. Rev. D36(1987) 581

    1987

  18. [25]

    Laine and A

    M. Laine and A. Vuorinen,Basics of thermal field theory,Lect. Notes Phys.925(2016) 1 [1701.01554]

    2016 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Berghaus, M

    K.V. Berghaus, M. Forslund and M.V. Guevarra,Warm inflation with a heavy QCD axion, JCAP10(2024) 103 [2402.13535]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Berghaus, M

    K.V. Berghaus, M. Drewes and S. Zell,Warm inflation with the Standard Model, 2503.18829

  21. [29]

    Drewes and S

    M. Drewes and S. Zell,On sphaleron heating in the presence of fermions,JCAP06(2024) 038 [2312.13739]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Le Bellac,Thermal field theory, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press (1996)

    M. Le Bellac,Thermal field theory, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press (1996)

    1996

  23. [31]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera and R.O. Ramos,Dissipation coefficients from scalar and fermion quantum field interactions,JCAP09(2011) 033 [1008.1929]

    2011 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Morikawa and M

    M. Morikawa and M. Sasaki,Entropy Production in the Inflationary Universe,Prog. Theor. Phys.72(1984) 782

    1984

  25. [33]

    Bodeker,An effective theory for hot nonAbelian dynamics, in5th International Workshop on Thermal Field Theories and Their Applications, 10, 1998 [hep-ph/9810265]

    D. Bodeker,An effective theory for hot nonAbelian dynamics, in5th International Workshop on Thermal Field Theories and Their Applications, 10, 1998 [hep-ph/9810265]

    1998 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Blaizot and E

    J.-P. Blaizot and E. Iancu,The quark-gluon plasma: Collective dynamics and hard thermal loops,Phys. Rept.359(2002) 355 [hep-ph/0101103]

    2002 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Blaizot and E

    J.P. Blaizot and E. Iancu,Soft collective excitations in hot gauge theories,Nucl. Phys. B417 (1994) 608 [hep-ph/9306294]

    1994 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Arnold, D

    P.B. Arnold, D. Son and L.G. Yaffe,The hot baryon violation rate isO(α 5 wT 4),Phys. Rev. D 55(1997) 6264 [hep-ph/9609481]

    1997 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Pisarski,Scattering amplitudes in hot gauge theories,Phys

    R.D. Pisarski,Scattering amplitudes in hot gauge theories,Phys. Rev. Lett.63(1989) 1129

    1989

  30. [38]

    Braaten and R.D

    E. Braaten and R.D. Pisarski,Soft amplitudes in hot gauge theories: A general analysis, Nucl. Phys. B337(1990) 569

    1990

  31. [39]

    Kapusta and C

    J.I. Kapusta and C. Gale,Finite-temperature field theory: Principles and applications, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press (2006)

    2006

  32. [40]

    Linde,Infrared problem in the thermodynamics of the Yang-Mills gas,Phys

    A.D. Linde,Infrared problem in the thermodynamics of the Yang-Mills gas,Phys. Lett. B96 (1980) 289

    1980

  33. [41]

    Cucchieri, F

    A. Cucchieri, F. Karsch and P. Petreczky,Magnetic screening in hot nonAbelian gauge theory,Phys. Lett. B497(2001) 80 [hep-lat/0004027]. – 44 –

    2001 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Pisarski,Damping rates for moving particles in hot QCD,hep-ph/9302242

    R.D. Pisarski,Damping rates for moving particles in hot QCD,hep-ph/9302242

    arXiv

  35. [43]

    Braaten and R.D

    E. Braaten and R.D. Pisarski,Resummation and gauge invariance of the gluon damping rate in hot qcd,Phys. Rev. Lett.64(1990) 1338

    1990

  36. [44]

    Rebhan,Comment on ‘Damping of energetic gluons and quarks in high temperature QCD’,Phys

    A. Rebhan,Comment on ‘Damping of energetic gluons and quarks in high temperature QCD’,Phys. Rev. D46(1992) 482 [hep-ph/9203211]

    1992 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Heiselberg and C.J

    H. Heiselberg and C.J. Pethick,Quark and gluon relaxation in quark-gluon plasmas,Phys. Rev. D47(1993) R769(R)

    1993

  38. [46]

    Burgess and A.L

    C.P. Burgess and A.L. Marini,The Damping of energetic gluons and quarks in high temperature QCD,Phys. Rev. D45(1992) 17 [hep-th/9109051]

    1992 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Braaten and R.D

    E. Braaten and R.D. Pisarski,Calculation of the gluon damping rate in hot QCD,Phys. Rev. D42(1990) 2156

    1990

  40. [48]

    Berera, I.G

    A. Berera, I.G. Moss and R.O. Ramos,Warm inflation and its microphysical basis,Rept. Prog. Phys.72(2009) 026901 [0808.1855]

    2009 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Graham and I.G

    C. Graham and I.G. Moss,Density fluctuations from warm inflation,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics07(2009) 013 [0905.3500]

    2009 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera and R.O. Ramos,Shear viscous effects on the primordial power spectrum from warm inflation,JCAP07(2011) 030 [1106.0701]

    2011 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Bastero-Gil, A

    M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, I.G. Moss and R.O. Ramos,Cosmological fluctuations of a random field and radiation fluid,JCAP05(2014) 004 [1401.1149]

    2014 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Hall, I.G

    L.M.H. Hall, I.G. Moss and A. Berera,Scalar perturbation spectra from warm inflation, Phys. Rev. D69(2004) 083525 [astro-ph/0305015]

    2004 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Ramos and L.A

    R.O. Ramos and L.A. da Silva,Power spectrum for inflation models with quantum and thermal noises,JCAP03(2013) 032 [1302.3544]

    2013 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Khlebnikov and M

    S. Khlebnikov and M. Shaposhnikov,The statistical theory of anomalous fermion number non-conservation,Nuclear Physics B308(1988) 885

    1988

  47. [55]

    Laine, L

    M. Laine, L. Niemi, S. Procacci and K. Rummukainen,Shape of the hot topological charge density spectral function,JHEP11(2022) 126 [2209.13804]. – 45 –

    2022 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.