Cosmological Collider Physics and the Curvaton

Raman Sundrum; Soubhik Kumar

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 11 cited by

Cosmological Collider Physics and the Curvaton

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In the curvaton scenario, heavy scalars and fermions can leave observable non-Gaussianities, with benchmark loop amplitudes of $10^{-2}$–$10^{-1}$ for scalars and $10^{-3}$ for fermions.

desk verdict Solid, useful paper: curvaton's separate low EFT cutoff genuinely boosts heavy-particle NG, but the fermion-loop observability claim rests on a benchmark outside the paper's own control bound. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.11378 v2 pith:U22UKJ7C submitted 2019-08-29 hep-ph astro-ph.CO

Soubhik Kumar , Raman Sundrum This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-phastro-ph.CO

keywords curvatonprimordialnon-Gaussianitycosmologicalcolliderphysicssqueezedlimiteffectivefieldtheoryheavyparticlesinflation

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

The paper asks whether heavy particles with masses near the inflationary Hubble scale $H$ can leave detectable cosmological-collider signatures. In standard single-field inflation, shift symmetry and the high energy scale of the inflaton potential suppress the relevant couplings, so non-Gaussianities from such particles are often unobservable. The paper's claim is that in the curvaton scenario—where one field drives the expansion and a second light field seeds the fluctuations—the curvaton can carry its own much lower effective-field-theory cutoff, making couplings to heavy scalars and fermions far stronger while keeping the EFT controlled. For benchmark parameters the loop-level bispectrum amplitudes reach $\sim 10^{-1}$ for charged scalars and $\sim 10^{-3}$ for charged fermions, orders of magnitude above the standard-inflation predictions. The setup also predicts a robust local non-Gaussianity $f_{\rm NL}^{\rm loc}=-5/4$, testable by upcoming surveys.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a two-sector sequestered effective field theory in which the curvaton $\sigma$ has its own cutoff $\Lambda_\sigma$ much smaller than the inflaton cutoff $\Lambda_\phi$. Shift-symmetric derivative operators, $\Lambda_\sigma^{-2}(\partial\sigma)^2\chi^\dagger\chi$ for scalars and $\Lambda_\sigma^{-3}(\partial\sigma)^2\bar\Psi\Psi$ for fermions, couple the curvaton to heavy states; a heavier mediator with coupling $\mu\Sigma\chi^\dagger\chi$ is integrated out to give $\Lambda_{\sigma,\mathrm{eff}}\simeq M_\Sigma^2\Lambda_\sigma/\mu\sim 4H$. The diagnostic signal is the non-analytic squeezed-limit three-point function, whose scaling $\propto (k_3/k_1)^{3+2i\mu}$ for scalars and $\propto (k_3/k_1)^{4+2i\tilde\mu}$ for fermions is the on-shell fingerprint of a particle with mass $\sim H$.

What would settle it

A future cosmic-variance-limited 21-cm or large-scale-structure measurement of the squeezed bispectrum reaching $\sigma_{f_{\rm NL}}\sim 10^{-4}$ that finds neither the predicted non-analytic oscillations at $|f_{\chi,\mathrm{loop}}|\sim 10^{-2}$–$10^{-1}$ (or $|f_{\Psi,\mathrm{loop}}|\sim 10^{-3}$) nor the local $f_{\rm NL}^{\rm loc}=-5/4$ would falsify the benchmark curvaton-collider scenario.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that primordial fluctuations sourced by a curvaton rather than by the inflaton open a much larger window for heavy-particle signatures. With the inflaton and curvaton in sequestered sectors, the hierarchy $\Lambda_\phi \gtrsim V_{\rm inf}^{1/4} > 250H \gg \Lambda_\sigma \gtrsim V_\sigma^{1/4}\sim 10H$ is consistent, and after integrating out a mediator the effective curvaton cutoff can fall to $\Lambda_\sigma\sim 4H$. Couplings such as $\Lambda_\sigma^{-2}(\partial\sigma)^2\chi^\dagger\chi$ then generate squeezed-limit bispectra whose non-analytic momentum dependence $(k_3/k_1)^\Delta$ carries the heavy mass and spin. Explicit in-in calculations give $|f_{\chi,\mathrm{loop}}|\sim 10^{-2}$–$10^{-1}$ and $|f_{\Psi,\mathrm{loop}}|\sim 10^{-3}$ for $\Lambda_\sigma=4H$, $\dot\sigma_0=-H^2$, making loop-level cosmological collider signals observable in principle.

Load-bearing premise

The enhancement depends on the assumption that the inflaton and curvaton can be sequestered into two sectors with independent EFT cutoffs, so that the curvaton cutoff can sit at a few times $H$ even though the curvaton's field value is far above it; if this separation has no ultraviolet completion, the predicted boost in non-Gaussianity disappears.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For benchmark parameters, loop-level non-Gaussianity from charged scalars and fermions moves from $|f|\sim 10^{-9}$ in the standard inflationary paradigm to $|f|\sim 10^{-2}$–$10^{-1}$ and $\sim 10^{-3}$, putting these targets within reach of future large-scale-structure and 21-cm experiments.
A detection in the squeezed limit would measure the exponent $\mu=\sqrt{m^2/H^2-9/4}$ or $\tilde\mu=m_\Psi/H$ and the associated angular dependence, giving on-shell mass and spin information for particles far beyond terrestrial collider energies.
No classical fine-tuning is needed: the curvaton-induced mass shift $\dot\sigma_0^2/\Lambda_\sigma^2$ is small, unlike the inflaton-induced $\dot\varphi_0^2/\Lambda_\varphi^2$ contamination in standard inflation.
Independent of the heavy particles, the scenario predicts a local non-Gaussianity $f_{\rm NL}^{\rm loc}=-5/4$, a signature of the curvaton that upcoming surveys are expected to test.
The same coupling portal applies to Standard Model gauge-charged states such as $W$-boson loops, so the 'heavy-lifted' Standard Model signals become promising targets for future observations.

Reading between the lines

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

Extension: the same two-sector construction should boost four-point (trispectrum) signals even more aggressively, because a trispectrum can be generated without a $\dot\sigma_0$ insertion, allowing a lower $V_\sigma$ and hence a lower $\Lambda_\sigma$.
Extension: if the sequestered sectors are realized in an extra dimension, Kaluza–Klein gravitons necessarily mediate between them; computing their squeezed bispectrum would test whether spin-2 heavy states also become observable.
Extension: the axial coupling $\partial_\mu\sigma\,\bar\Psi\gamma^\mu\gamma^5\Psi$ is set aside in this paper; a dedicated calculation could reveal whether it produces a chemical-potential enhancement analogous to the inflaton case.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Here's my take: this is a good paper with a genuinely useful idea. In the curvaton scenario, the primordial-fluctuation sector can have a much lower EFT cutoff than the inflaton sector, so heavy particles coupled to the curvaton can produce non-Gaussianities far above the standard-inflation estimates. The three explicit amplitudes (tree-level Higgs, scalar loop, fermion loop) are concrete, and the appendices give enough detail to reproduce them. I believe the central mechanism is sound.

The paper is honest about what it does and doesn't do. It acknowledges the independent nearby work [28], and the proof-of-principle UV completions (bi-axion alignment, brane sequestering) are clearly flagged as such. The comparison to the standard-inflation baseline in Sec. 4 is a useful corrective: without the curvaton trick, charged scalar and fermion loops are indeed unobservable.

The soft spot is the mediator benchmark that carries the fermion-loop claim. In Sec. 5, integrating out a mediator with MΣ=3H and μΣ=6H gives an effective cutoff Λσ,e≈4H, which is below the paper's own control bound Vσ^{1/4}≈7H. And the plotted heavy-particle masses extend up to 7H, above both MΣ and Λσ,e, so the effective operator is being used outside its domain of validity. If you rescale the fermion loop to a cutoff that actually respects the control condition, the amplitude drops to roughly the 10^-4 sensitivity edge, so 'observable loop-level fermion signal' is the least secure quantitative statement. The scalar loop survives the rescaling and remains well above threshold, so the main qualitative conclusion — that curvaton-mediated loop effects are observable — holds at least for scalars.

Minor notes: the tree-level formula is quoted from [10] rather than re-derived, which is fine; and the curvaton's own local fNL=-5/4 provides a smooth background that the heavy-particle oscillations must be extracted from, as the paper notes.

Who is this for? Cosmological collider phenomenologists and anyone working on curvaton models. It deserves a serious referee. I would send it out with a request to pay attention to the EFT-control question around the mediator benchmark and to ask the authors to state the observable claims for a range of Λσ respectful of Vσ^{1/4}.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper revisits cosmological-collider signatures of heavy particles in a curvaton model in which the inflaton and the curvaton belong to two sequestered sectors with independent EFT cutoffs, Λφ and Λσ. It first shows that in standard single-field inflation, loop-level non-Gaussianity from charged scalars and fermions is unobservably small, with |fNL| of order 10^-9, due to the high cutoff Λφ required by control of the inflaton potential. It then argues that because the curvaton does not drive the background expansion, its couplings to heavy fields need only be suppressed by Λσ ≫ Vσ^{1/4} ~ 10H, which can be much smaller than Λφ, and that integrating out mediator fields can reduce the effective suppression scale to about 4H. For the benchmark Λσ=4H and ˙σ0=-H², the paper finds tree-level Higgs-exchange |fχ,tree| of order 0.1, scalar-loop |fχ,loop| of order 10^-2-10^-1, and fermion-loop |fΨ,loop| of order 10^-3 (Figs. 4-6), claiming that loop-level effects become observable with 21-cm-level sensitivity. The explicit one-loop calculations are carried out in Appendices A and B using the loop-to-tree reduction of Arkani-Hamed and Maldacena, and the paper also discusses observational constraints, a bi-axion monodromy completion for the large curvaton field range, and prospects for future work.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper provides a concrete and simple route to large cosmological-collider signals: it avoids the standard Λφ > 250H suppression by separating the EFT describing curvature fluctuations from the EFT describing the inflationary background. The parametric scalings |fχ,loop| ~ 1/Λσ^4 and |fΨ,loop| ~ 1/Λσ^6 make the enhancement mechanism transparent, and the explicit loop-to-tree reduction in Appendices A and B gives the paper a degree of rigor that is not always present in such phenomenological studies. I also credit the paper for clearly comparing its predictions with current Planck bounds and future 21-cm sensitivities, and for identifying the field-range issue and proposing a UV completion. The main quantitative claim, however, is tied to the benchmark Λσ=4H, and the stated control condition in Eq. (5.3) points to a more conservative cutoff around 7-10H; the fermion-loop signal is especially sensitive to this choice. The significance is therefore genuine but conditional on a controlled justification of the benchmark cutoff.

major comments (3)

[Sec. 5, Eqs. (5.3), (5.10), Figs. 5 and 6] The numerical benchmark Λσ,e ≈ 4H is below the control lower bound Λσ ≳ Vσ^{1/4} ≈ 10H that the paper itself states in Eq. (5.3) for the benchmark ησ=10^-3. With the example values MΣ=3H and μΣ=6H, Eq. (5.10) gives Λσ,e ≈ 3.9H, and the residual theory after integrating out the mediator is not obviously an EFT whose cutoff lies above the curvaton energy scale. Because the fermion amplitude in Eq. (5.23) scales as Λσ^{-6}, replacing 4H by the compliant value 10H lowers |fΨ,loop| by a factor (4/10)^6 ≈ 4 × 10^-3, bringing the fermion-loop signal from ~10^-3 down to near or below the σ_fNL ≈ 10^-4 sensitivity quoted in Sec. 2. Please either justify the Λσ=4H benchmark against the control condition (5.3), or present the fermion-loop forecasts with a cutoff that satisfies (5.3).
[Sec. 5, Eq. (5.9), Figs. 5 and 6] The effective operator in Eq. (5.9) is obtained by integrating out a mediator of mass MΣ=3H, and the resulting effective cutoff is Λσ,e ≈ 4H, yet the loop amplitudes in Figs. 5 and 6 are plotted for heavy masses mχ and mΨ extending up to approximately 7H. The dimension-six operator in Eq. (5.9) is only valid for external momenta and heavy-field masses below MΣ and Λσ,e; for masses above these scales the heavy field should be integrated out together with the mediator. This extrapolation affects exactly the high-mass end of the curves that is used to support the claim that loop-level effects are observable, so the predictions in this region need to be restricted or recomputed.
[Sec. 3.1 and Sec. 5] The sequestered two-sector construction is the load-bearing premise of the paper, and its consistency with the presence of a common set of heavy fields {χ} in both L_int^φ and L_int^σ in Eq. (3.2) is not fully explained. If the heavy particles couple to both the inflaton and the curvaton, their inflaton couplings will also generate non-Gaussianity and may contaminate the curvaton signal or modify the scalar power spectrum beyond the quoted O(ρ1²/H²) estimate. The paper should either state explicitly that only the curvaton couplings are present in the benchmark scenario, or quantify the contribution of the inflaton couplings in the same setup.

minor comments (4)

[Sec. 5, after Eq. (5.10)] After Eq. (5.10) the notation Λσ is reused for Λσ,e, which makes it easy to confuse the effective suppression scale with the bare cutoff in Eqs. (5.19)-(5.24). I recommend keeping Λσ,e explicitly throughout Section 5.
[Sec. 5.1, Eq. (5.16)] The tree-level bispectrum in Eq. (5.16) is quoted from [10] without a derivation or a statement of normalization relative to Eq. (2.3). Since this formula drives the tree-level plot in Fig. 4, a brief derivation or at least an explicit matching of the conventions would be helpful.
[Sec. 4.3] The dimension-5 axial coupling ∂μσ Ψ̄γμγ5Ψ/Λσ is dismissed with a qualitative argument; a short quantitative estimate of the resulting non-Gaussianity would make it easier for the reader to verify that this channel indeed gives no substantial enhancement in the curvaton scenario.
[General] The manuscript contains several typos and formatting artifacts, such as 'non-renormalizabality' in Section 1 and an unclosed parenthesis in Eq. (5.8). A careful proofread would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the curvaton enhancement is a parametric consequence of the assumed two-sector EFT hierarchy, computed with an external cosmological-collider kernel; the numerical benchmark parameters are inputs, not fitted targets.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that heavy particles coupled to the curvaton produce larger non-Gaussianities than in standard inflation because the curvaton EFT cutoff can be much smaller than the inflaton cutoff. This follows from the stated hierarchy Λφ ≳ Vinf^{1/4} > 250H (eq. 1.2) versus Λσ ≳ Vσ^{1/4} ∼ 10H (eqs. 1.3 and 5.3) for the benchmark (3.22). The heavy-particle amplitudes in eqs. (5.19), (5.23), (A.10), and (B.5) are inverse powers of Λσ and use the squeezed-limit kernel of Arkani-Hamed and Maldacena [10], an independent external result, not an output of the present paper. No observational fNL value is used to set Λσ, ˙σ0, or the mediator parameters; the plots adopt Λσ=4H and ˙σ0=-H^2 as explicit inputs. The standard-inflation baseline estimates are drawn from the authors' earlier [18], but they are simple scaling estimates and are not load-bearing for the curvaton derivation: the enhancement is a direct consequence of replacing Λφ with Λσ in the operator (∂σ)^2χ†χ, and the curvaton result does not reduce to [18] by construction. The local fNL=-5/4 is a standard curvaton consequence, not a renamed fit. A possible concern is that the effective scale Λσ,e≈4H obtained from the mediator example (5.10) sits below the paper's own Vσ^{1/4}∼10H control estimate (5.3); but that is a benchmark-consistency or EFT-control objection, not an equivalence between an input and a predicted quantity. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained with respect to the claimed non-Gaussianity predictions, and no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The numerical predictions are governed by benchmark parameters that satisfy current constraints rather than being fitted to the NG signal. The main model-dependent axioms are the sequestered sectors, the low curvaton cutoff, the dominance and decay of the curvaton, and the use of standard de Sitter loop-to-tree results. The only genuinely invented entity is a mediator field used to lower the effective cutoff.

free parameters (7)

σ0/H (curvaton field value) = σ0/H ≈ 2.3×10^3 (H/σ0 ≈ 4.4×10^-4)
Fixed by the observed scalar power spectrum amplitude, eq. (3.15). Not fit to the NG signal, but it multiplies all curvaton NG amplitudes.
ησ = m²/H² = 10^-3
Benchmark satisfying the tilt constraint -2ϵ + 2ησ/3 ≈ -0.04, eq. (3.17). Sets Vσ ≈ (10H)^4, hence the lower bound on Λσ.
ϵ (slow-roll parameter) = 0.02
Benchmark slow-roll parameter consistent with tilt and tensor-to-scalar bound r < 0.06, eq. (3.22).
Λσ (effective curvaton EFT cutoff) = 10H (effective 4H)
Chosen at the lower edge allowed by Λσ > Vσ^(1/4); effective scale lowered by mediators, eq. (5.10). Controls the size of the predicted f.
ρ2 (curvaton-Higgs quadratic mixing) = 0.3H in Fig. 4
Quadratic mixing used for the tree-level plot; sets the strength of tree-level NG, eq. (5.15).
Mediator mass MΣ and coupling μΣ = MΣ = 3H, μΣ = 6H
Chosen to reduce the effective cutoff to about 4H, eq. (5.10). No independent observational handle is given.
˙σ0 (curvaton background velocity) = -H² in figures
Used in the numerical plots; consistent with slow roll and the benchmark ησ, σ0/H values.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The curvaton is a light spectator pNGB with quadratic potential Vσ = ½m²σ² during inflation.
Invoked in Sec. 3.1; gives scale-invariant δσ fluctuations and the relation ζ = (2/3)δσ/σ0.
ad hoc to paper φ and σ are sequestered into two sectors with independent EFT cutoffs Λφ and Λσ and no direct interactions beyond gravity.
Central model assumption, Secs. 1 and 3.1 (lagrangian eq. 3.2); enables Λσ much smaller than Λφ. No explicit UV completion is given, only ideas such as extra dimensions and branes.
ad hoc to paper Λσ > Vσ^(1/4) is sufficient for EFT control of the curvaton sector, and mediators can reduce the effective cutoff to about 4H.
Used in Sec. 5 to justify the numerical benchmark; the mediator construction is perturbative and not required by observations.
domain assumption The curvaton comes to dominate the energy density before decay (fσ ≈ 1) and decays into all SM fluids, avoiding isocurvature.
Standard curvaton condition, Sec. 3.1; needed for ζ = (2/3)δσ/σ0 and for the absence of isocurvature perturbations.
standard math The late-time de Sitter two-point functions and loop-to-tree reduction from refs. [10, 61] apply.
Used in Appendices A and B to compute the loop bispectra.
ad hoc to paper Bi-axion monodromy can realize σ0 much larger than Λσ consistently.
Proof-of-principle in Sec. 5; no explicit realization including the heavy fields is given.

invented entities (1)

Mediator field Σ
purpose: Couples (∂σ)² to χ†χ or Ψ̄Ψ to lower the effective EFT cutoff from about 10H to about 4H.
Introduced in Sec. 5, eq. (5.8). No mass or coupling prediction is made; it is purely a model-building device to boost signals.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cosmological Collider Physics and the Curvaton." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U22UKJ7C

@misc{pith2026190811378,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cosmological Collider Physics and the Curvaton},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U22UKJ7C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.11378}
}

read the original abstract

Primordial non-Gaussianity signatures of extremely heavy particles are re-examined within a simple alternative to the standard inflationary paradigm, in which the primordial fluctuations and the inflationary spacetime expansion are sourced by two different fields. The curvaton scenario provides an example of this in which the distinct roles are played by the curvaton and the inflaton fields, respectively. We study couplings of the curvaton to heavy particles with masses of order the inflationary Hubble scale, and show that they can lead to non-Gaussian signals orders of magnitude larger than those in standard inflation, consistent with explicit effective field theory control of inflationary dynamics. This brings various motivated particle physics signatures, such as loops of heavy gauge-charged scalars and fermions, within future observational reach.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 11 Pith papers

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

Anatomy of Family Trees in Cosmological Correlators
hep-th 2025-09 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

A complete map of singularities and local series expansions for the hypergeometric building blocks of tree-level cosmological correlators.
Propagator positivity bounds for cosmological correlators
hep-th 2025-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

An infinite tower of two-sided positivity bounds constrains the EFT coefficients of heavy fields on de Sitter, ruling out correlators with no unitary/causal UV completion.
The Exact and Approximate Tales of Boost-Breaking Cosmological Correlators
hep-th 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

The tree-level boost-breaking cosmological collider seed correlator is computed exactly for general sound speed and chemical potential, and saddle-point methods turn it into practical elementary-function templates.
Wonderings on Wiggly Bispectra: Non-linear Evolution and Reconstruction of Oscillations in the Squeezed Bispectrum
astro-ph.CO 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

Non-linear structure formation damps oscillatory squeezed bispectra with cos(µ ln(q/k)) shape by k ~ 0.3 h/Mpc at z = 0, and iterative reconstruction recovers most of the signal.
Searching for Inflationary Physics with the CMB Trispectrum: 1. Primordial Theory & Optimal Estimators
astro-ph.CO 2025-02 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

A set of quasi-optimal CMB trispectrum estimators is derived for local, EFT, direction-dependent, spinning-particle, point-source, and lensing templates, enabling first collider searches.
Massive Inflationary Amplitudes: Differential Equations and Complete Solutions for General Trees
hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

Every tree-level massive inflation correlator in the signal region can be written as one massive family tree series plus its cuts, with 2I summation variables.
Effective Field Theory and In-In Correlators
hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

Matching in-in correlators between a full theory and its effective theory requires extra boundary terms in flat space, but those terms fade away in de Sitter space.
Cosmological Collider Signatures from Right-Handed Neutrino Loop
hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.5 of 10

Right-handed neutrino loops in inflation with seesaw mechanism generate enhanced cosmological collider signatures via a chemical potential from a dimension-5 operator, softening Boltzmann suppression and amplifying os...
AGILE: an end-to-end Rubin-LSST simulation of AGNs, galaxies, and stars I. Software description and first data release
astro-ph.GA 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

AGILE builds a 24 deg² truth catalog and a 1 deg² three-year LSST pilot (DR1) to measure flux recovery and Type-1 AGN completeness/purity from color and variability selections.
Searching for Inflationary Physics with the CMB Trispectrum: 3. Constraints from Planck
astro-ph.CO 2025-02 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

A comprehensive Planck PR4 trispectrum analysis finds no primordial non-Gaussianity across 33 templates and sets leading constraints, including tau_NL loc < 1500 at 95% CL.
Cosmological Correlators at the Loop Level
hep-th 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Using the partial Mellin-Barnes method, the author derives analytic signals from one-loop bubble diagrams in inflation correlators, including the first analytic results for a de Sitter boost-breaking bubble.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · cited by 11 Pith papers

[28]

S. Lu, Y. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu,A Cosmological Higgs Collider, arXiv:1907.07390

arXiv 1907
[10]

Arkani-Hamed and J

N. Arkani-Hamed and J. Maldacena,Cosmological Collider Physics, arXiv:1503.08043

arXiv
[1]

D. Baumann,Inﬂation, inPhysics of the large and the small, TASI 09, proceedings of the Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics, Boulder, Colorado, USA, 1-26 June 2009, pp. 523–686, 2011.arXiv:0907.5424

arXiv 2009
[2]

Akrami et al.,Planck 2018 results

Planck Collaboration, Y. Akrami et al.,Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inﬂation, arXiv:1807.06211

arXiv 2018
[3]

Chen and Y

X. Chen and Y. Wang,Quasi-Single Field Inﬂation and Non-Gaussianities, JCAP 1004 (2010) 027, [arXiv:0911.3380]

arXiv 2010
[4]

Baumann and D

D. Baumann and D. Green,Signatures of Supersymmetry from the Early Universe, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 103520, [arXiv:1109.0292]

arXiv 2012
[5]

Assassi, D

V. Assassi, D. Baumann, and D. Green,On Soft Limits of Inﬂationary Correlation Functions, JCAP 1211 (2012) 047, [arXiv:1204.4207]

arXiv 2012
[6]

Chen and Y

X. Chen and Y. Wang,Quasi-Single Field Inﬂation with Large Mass, JCAP 1209 (2012) 021, [arXiv:1205.0160]

arXiv 2012

Show all 61 references

[7]

Noumi, M

T. Noumi, M. Yamaguchi, and D. Yokoyama,Eﬀective ﬁeld theory approach to quasi-single ﬁeld inﬂation and eﬀects of heavy ﬁelds, JHEP 06 (2013) 051, [arXiv:1211.1624]

2013 arXiv
[8]

Pi and M

S. Pi and M. Sasaki,Curvature Perturbation Spectrum in Two-ﬁeld Inﬂation with a Turning Trajectory, JCAP 1210 (2012) 051, [arXiv:1205.0161]

2012 arXiv
[9]

J.-O. Gong, S. Pi, and M. Sasaki,Equilateral non-Gaussianity from heavy ﬁelds, JCAP 1311 (2013) 043, [arXiv:1306.3691]

2013 arXiv
[11]

H. Lee, D. Baumann, and G. L. Pimentel,Non-Gaussianity as a Particle Detector, JHEP 12 (2016) 040, [arXiv:1607.03735]. – 24 –

2016 arXiv
[12]

X. Chen, Y. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu,Loop Corrections to Standard Model Fields in Inﬂation, JHEP 08 (2016) 051, [arXiv:1604.07841]

2016 arXiv
[13]

X. Chen, Y. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu,Standard Model Background of the Cosmological Collider, Phys. Rev. Lett.118 (2017), no. 26 261302, [arXiv:1610.06597]

2017 arXiv
[14]

X. Chen, Y. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu,Standard Model Mass Spectrum in Inﬂationary Universe, JHEP 04 (2017) 058, [arXiv:1612.08122]

2017 arXiv
[15]

X. Chen, Y. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu,Schwinger-Keldysh Diagrammatics for Primordial Perturbations, JCAP 1712 (2017), no. 12 006, [arXiv:1703.10166]

2017 arXiv
[16]

Kehagias and A

A. Kehagias and A. Riotto,On the Inﬂationary Perturbations of Massive Higher-Spin Fields, JCAP 1707 (2017), no. 07 046, [arXiv:1705.05834]

2017 arXiv
[17]

H. An, M. McAneny, A. K. Ridgway, and M. B. Wise,Quasi Single Field Inﬂation in the non-perturbative regime, JHEP 06 (2018) 105, [arXiv:1706.09971]

2018 arXiv
[18]

Kumar and R

S. Kumar and R. Sundrum,Heavy-Lifting of Gauge Theories By Cosmic Inﬂation, JHEP 05 (2018) 011, [arXiv:1711.03988]

2018 arXiv
[19]

Baumann, G

D. Baumann, G. Goon, H. Lee, and G. L. Pimentel,Partially Massless Fields During Inﬂation, JHEP 04 (2018) 140, [arXiv:1712.06624]

2018 arXiv
[20]

X. Chen, Y. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu,Neutrino Signatures in Primordial Non-Gaussianities, JHEP 09 (2018) 022, [arXiv:1805.02656]

2018 arXiv
[21]

H. An, M. B. Wise, and Z. Zhang,De Sitter Quantum Loops as the origin of Primordial Non-Gaussianities, Phys. Rev. D99 (2019), no. 5 056007, [arXiv:1806.05194]

2019 arXiv
[22]

X. Chen, A. Loeb, and Z.-Z. Xianyu,Unique Fingerprints of Alternatives to Inﬂation in the Primordial Power Spectrum, Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019), no. 12 121301, [arXiv:1809.02603]

2019 arXiv
[23]

Kumar and R

S. Kumar and R. Sundrum,Seeing Higher-Dimensional Grand Uniﬁcation In Primordial Non-Gaussianities, JHEP 04 (2019) 120, [arXiv:1811.11200]

2019 arXiv
[24]

Arkani-Hamed, D

N. Arkani-Hamed, D. Baumann, H. Lee, and G. L. Pimentel,The Cosmological Bootstrap: Inﬂationary Correlators from Symmetries and Singularities, arXiv:1811.00024

arXiv
[25]

L. Li, T. Nakama, C. M. Sou, Y. Wang, and S. Zhou,Gravitational Production of Superheavy Dark Matter and Associated Cosmological Signatures, JHEP 07 (2019) 067, [arXiv:1903.08842]

2019 arXiv
[26]

Y.-P. Wu, L. Yang, and A. Kusenko,Leptogenesis from spontaneous symmetry breaking during inﬂation, arXiv:1905.10537

1905 arXiv
[27]

Alexander, S

S. Alexander, S. J. Gates, L. Jenks, K. Koutrolikos, and E. McDonough,Higher Spin Supersymmetry at the Cosmological Collider: Sculpting SUSY Rilles in the CMB, arXiv:1907.05829

1907 arXiv
[29]

A. Hook, J. Huang, and D. Racco,Searches for other vacua II: A new Higgstory at the cosmological collider, arXiv:1907.10624

1907 arXiv
[30]

A. Hook, J. Huang, and D. Racco,Minimal signatures of the Standard Model in non-Gaussianities, arXiv:1908.00019. – 25 –

1908 arXiv
[31]

Akrami et al.,Planck 2018 results

Planck Collaboration, Y. Akrami et al.,Planck 2018 results. IX. Constraints on primordial non-Gaussianity, arXiv:1905.05697

2018 arXiv
[32]

Alvarez et al.,Testing Inﬂation with Large Scale Structure: Connecting Hopes with Reality, arXiv:1412.4671

M. Alvarez et al.,Testing Inﬂation with Large Scale Structure: Connecting Hopes with Reality, arXiv:1412.4671

arXiv
[33]

Moradinezhad Dizgah and C

A. Moradinezhad Dizgah and C. Dvorkin,Scale-Dependent Galaxy Bias from Massive Particles with Spin during Inﬂation, JCAP 1801 (2018), no. 01 010, [arXiv:1708.06473]

2018 arXiv
[34]

Moradinezhad Dizgah, H

A. Moradinezhad Dizgah, H. Lee, J. B. Muñoz, and C. Dvorkin,Galaxy Bispectrum from Massive Spinning Particles, JCAP 1805 (2018), no. 05 013, [arXiv:1801.07265]

2018 arXiv
[35]

P. D. Meerburg, M. Munchmeyer, J. B. Muñoz, and X. Chen,Prospects for Cosmological Collider Physics, JCAP 1703 (2017), no. 03 050, [arXiv:1610.06559]

2017 arXiv
[36]

Creminelli,On non-Gaussianities in single-ﬁeld inﬂation, JCAP 0310 (2003) 003, [astro-ph/0306122]

P. Creminelli,On non-Gaussianities in single-ﬁeld inﬂation, JCAP 0310 (2003) 003, [astro-ph/0306122]

2003 arXiv
[37]

Cheung, P

C. Cheung, P. Creminelli, A. L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan, and L. Senatore,The Eﬀective Field Theory of Inﬂation, JHEP 03 (2008) 014, [arXiv:0709.0293]

2008 arXiv
[38]

Alishahiha, E

M. Alishahiha, E. Silverstein, and D. Tong,DBI in the sky, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 123505, [hep-th/0404084]

2004 arXiv
[39]

Baumann and D

D. Baumann and D. Green,Equilateral Non-Gaussianity and New Physics on the Horizon, JCAP 1109 (2011) 014, [arXiv:1102.5343]

2011 arXiv
[40]

Enqvist and M

K. Enqvist and M. S. Sloth,Adiabatic CMB perturbations in pre - big bang string cosmology, Nucl. Phys. B626 (2002) 395–409, [hep-ph/0109214]

2002 arXiv
[41]

D. H. Lyth and D. Wands,Generating the curvature perturbation without an inﬂaton, Phys. Lett. B524 (2002) 5–14, [hep-ph/0110002]

2002 arXiv
[42]

Moroi and T

T. Moroi and T. Takahashi,Eﬀects of cosmological moduli ﬁelds on cosmic microwave background, Phys. Lett. B522 (2001) 215–221, [hep-ph/0110096]. [Erratum: Phys. Lett.B539,303(2002)]

2001 arXiv
[43]

Loeb and M

A. Loeb and M. Zaldarriaga,Measuring the small - scale power spectrum of cosmic density ﬂuctuations through 21 cm tomography prior to the epoch of structure formation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 211301, [astro-ph/0312134]

2004 arXiv
[44]

Wands, K

D. Wands, K. A. Malik, D. H. Lyth, and A. R. Liddle,A New approach to the evolution of cosmological perturbations on large scales, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 043527, [astro-ph/0003278]

2000 arXiv
[45]

Weinberg,Adiabatic modes in cosmology, Phys

S. Weinberg,Adiabatic modes in cosmology, Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 123504, [astro-ph/0302326]

2003 arXiv
[46]

D. H. Lyth, C. Ungarelli, and D. Wands,The Primordial density perturbation in the curvaton scenario, Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 023503, [astro-ph/0208055]

2003 arXiv
[47]

D. H. Lyth and Y. Rodriguez,The Inﬂationary prediction for primordial non-Gaussianity, Phys. Rev. Lett.95 (2005) 121302, [astro-ph/0504045]

2005 arXiv
[48]

Bartolo, S

N. Bartolo, S. Matarrese, and A. Riotto,On nonGaussianity in the curvaton scenario, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 043503, [hep-ph/0309033]

2004 arXiv
[49]

Sasaki, J

M. Sasaki, J. Valiviita, and D. Wands,Non-Gaussianity of the primordial perturbation in the curvaton model, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 103003, [astro-ph/0607627]. – 26 –

2006 arXiv
[50]

J. M. Maldacena,Non-Gaussian features of primordial ﬂuctuations in single ﬁeld inﬂationary models, JHEP 05 (2003) 013, [astro-ph/0210603]

2003 arXiv
[51]

Creminelli and M

P. Creminelli and M. Zaldarriaga,Single ﬁeld consistency relation for the 3-point function, JCAP 0410 (2004) 006, [astro-ph/0407059]

2004 arXiv
[52]

J. E. Kim, H. P. Nilles, and M. Peloso,Completing natural inﬂation, JCAP 0501 (2005) 005, [hep-ph/0409138]

2005 arXiv
[53]

K. Choi, H. Kim, and S. Yun,Natural inﬂation with multiple sub-Planckian axions, Phys. Rev. D90 (2014) 023545, [arXiv:1404.6209]

2014 arXiv
[54]

S. H. H. Tye and S. S. C. Wong,Helical Inﬂation and Cosmic Strings, arXiv:1404.6988

arXiv
[55]

Ben-Dayan, F

I. Ben-Dayan, F. G. Pedro, and A. Westphal,Hierarchical Axion Inﬂation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 261301, [arXiv:1404.7773]

2014 arXiv
[56]

Bai and B

Y. Bai and B. A. Stefanek,Natural millicharged inﬂation, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015), no. 9 096012, [arXiv:1405.6720]

2015 arXiv
[57]

de la Fuente, P

A. de la Fuente, P. Saraswat, and R. Sundrum,Natural Inﬂation and Quantum Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.114 (2015), no. 15 151303, [arXiv:1412.3457]

2015 arXiv
[58]

Kawamura,Gauge symmetry breaking from extra space S**1 / Z(2), Prog

Y. Kawamura,Gauge symmetry breaking from extra space S**1 / Z(2), Prog. Theor. Phys. 103 (2000) 613–619, [hep-ph/9902423]

2000 arXiv
[59]

Kawamura,Triplet doublet splitting, proton stability and extra dimension, Prog

Y. Kawamura,Triplet doublet splitting, proton stability and extra dimension, Prog. Theor. Phys. 105 (2001) 999–1006, [hep-ph/0012125]

2001 arXiv
[60]

L. J. Hall and Y. Nomura,Grand uniﬁcation in higher dimensions, Annals Phys. 306 (2003) 132–156, [hep-ph/0212134]. [,432(2002)]

2003 arXiv
[61]

Allen and C

B. Allen and C. A. LÃĳtken,Spinor two-point functions in maximally symmetric spaces, Comm. Math. Phys.106 (1986), no. 2 201–210. – 27 –

1986

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [28]

S. Lu, Y. Wang, and Z.-Z. Xianyu,A Cosmological Higgs Collider, arXiv:1907.07390

arXiv 1907

[2] [10]

Arkani-Hamed and J

N. Arkani-Hamed and J. Maldacena,Cosmological Collider Physics, arXiv:1503.08043

arXiv

[3] [1]

D. Baumann,Inﬂation, inPhysics of the large and the small, TASI 09, proceedings of the Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics, Boulder, Colorado, USA, 1-26 June 2009, pp. 523–686, 2011.arXiv:0907.5424

arXiv 2009

[4] [2]

Akrami et al.,Planck 2018 results

Planck Collaboration, Y. Akrami et al.,Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inﬂation, arXiv:1807.06211

arXiv 2018

[5] [3]

Chen and Y

X. Chen and Y. Wang,Quasi-Single Field Inﬂation and Non-Gaussianities, JCAP 1004 (2010) 027, [arXiv:0911.3380]

arXiv 2010

[6] [4]

Baumann and D

D. Baumann and D. Green,Signatures of Supersymmetry from the Early Universe, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 103520, [arXiv:1109.0292]

arXiv 2012

[7] [5]

Assassi, D

V. Assassi, D. Baumann, and D. Green,On Soft Limits of Inﬂationary Correlation Functions, JCAP 1211 (2012) 047, [arXiv:1204.4207]

arXiv 2012

[8] [6]

Chen and Y

X. Chen and Y. Wang,Quasi-Single Field Inﬂation with Large Mass, JCAP 1209 (2012) 021, [arXiv:1205.0160]

arXiv 2012