pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.17813 · v1 · pith:VWCAWTM6new · submitted 2026-05-18 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.CO· hep-th

Positive Running of the Spectral Index for Scalar Theory and Modified Gravity

S.D. Odintsov , V.K.Oikonomou This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 10:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.COhep-th
keywords inflationspectral index runningEinstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravitymodified gravityGW170817F(R) gravitycosmological constraints
0
0 comments X

The pith

Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity allows positive running of the spectral index during viable inflation while matching GW170817 constraints.

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

The paper investigates whether inflationary models can produce a positive running of the spectral index, as mildly indicated by recent ACT data. Standard minimally coupled scalar field theories and F(R) gravity encounter difficulties achieving this while maintaining a viable inflationary regime and tend to align better with Planck observations. Nuanced scalar scenarios can fit the ACT indications. In contrast, Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet theories that remain compatible with the GW170817 event readily yield positive running alongside successful inflation.

Core claim

In the context of Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet theories compatible with the GW170817 event, the running of the spectral index can easily be positive while in parallel having a viable inflationary era, whereas scalar field inflation and F(R) gravity mostly struggle to produce positive running without compromising viability.

What carries the argument

Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity formulations that preserve the speed of gravitational waves as required by the GW170817 observation.

If this is right

  • Confirmation of positive running would rule out several popular scalar-field and F(R)-based inflationary models.
  • Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet scenarios provide a direct route to positive running without sacrificing the inflationary era.
  • Nuanced adjustments in scalar field models remain possible but are more constrained than in Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If future data confirm positive running, cosmological model selection may shift toward string-origin modified gravity frameworks.
  • Explicit construction of the required Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet functions would allow direct comparison against observational bounds beyond those mentioned.
  • The approach could be extended to examine whether the same models address additional tensions such as the Hubble constant discrepancy.

Load-bearing premise

Specific forms of Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity exist that can simultaneously obey GW170817 constraints, deliver viable inflation, and generate positive spectral index running without violating other cosmological bounds.

What would settle it

Future CMB experiments reporting a negative or zero value for the running of the spectral index, or the absence of any explicit Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet functions that meet all listed constraints at once.

read the original abstract

In this work we address the possibility of having a positive running of the spectral index in inflationary theories. The recent ACT data indicate mildly that the running of the spectral index might be positive, and several other physical indications point out this possibility. If the running of the spectral index is confirmed to be positive by future cosmic microwave background experiments, this can rule out quite popular inflationary scenarios. We investigate how it is possible to obtain a positive running of the spectral index in the context of minimally coupled scalar field gravity and modified gravity. For the modified gravity we choose two mainstream and of string origin candidate theories, $F(R)$ gravity and Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity. In the case of scalar field inflation and $F(R)$ gravity inflation, we demonstrate the difficulties for obtaining a positive running of the spectral index for a viable inflationary regime, so scalar theories and $F(R)$ gravity are mostly compatible with the Planck data. But nuanced scalar field scenarios can be compatible with the ACT data and produce a positive running of the spectral index. In the context of Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet theories which are compatible with the GW170817 event, the running of the spectral index can easily be positive while in parallel having a viable inflationary era.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines the conditions under which the running of the spectral index α_s can be positive in inflationary cosmology. It analyzes minimally coupled scalar field models and two modified gravity theories of string origin: F(R) gravity and Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet (EGB) gravity. The authors conclude that scalar field and F(R) models generally struggle to produce positive α_s while maintaining a viable inflationary era consistent with Planck data, although certain nuanced scalar scenarios can align with ACT indications. In contrast, EGB models that satisfy the GW170817 constraint (speed of tensor modes c_T = 1) are shown to readily allow positive running together with viable slow-roll inflation.

Significance. Should the EGB construction prove robust, the paper offers a concrete modified gravity framework capable of generating α_s > 0 without conflicting with current gravitational wave speed constraints or inflationary observables. This is noteworthy because a confirmed positive running would exclude many popular single-field models, and the EGB approach provides a potential alternative rooted in higher-curvature corrections. The explicit contrast drawn between the three classes of models is a useful organizing contribution.

major comments (1)
  1. [EGB analysis] EGB compatibility section: The central claim that positive running 'can easily be positive' while satisfying GW170817 (c_T = 1) is load-bearing. The compatibility condition typically imposes an algebraic constraint on the Gauss-Bonnet coupling derivative (commonly f'(φ) = 0 or an equivalent background relation). Under this constraint the modified perturbation equations reduce to those of GR plus a canonical scalar, removing the extra contributions to the slow-roll hierarchy that would otherwise allow α_s to change sign. The manuscript must supply an explicit functional form or numerical example demonstrating that the constrained coupling still produces α_s > 0 while keeping ε, η, and r inside observational windows; without this the 'easily' qualifier remains unverified.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'nuanced scalar field scenarios' compatible with ACT data; a one-sentence characterization of the required potential or parameter regime would improve clarity for readers.
  2. [Throughout] Notation for the running (α_s versus dn_s/dlnk) should be uniform across text, equations, and tables.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the major comment as follows.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [EGB analysis] EGB compatibility section: The central claim that positive running 'can easily be positive' while satisfying GW170817 (c_T = 1) is load-bearing. The compatibility condition typically imposes an algebraic constraint on the Gauss-Bonnet coupling derivative (commonly f'(φ) = 0 or an equivalent background relation). Under this constraint the modified perturbation equations reduce to those of GR plus a canonical scalar, removing the extra contributions to the slow-roll hierarchy that would otherwise allow α_s to change sign. The manuscript must supply an explicit functional form or numerical example demonstrating that the constrained coupling still produces α_s > 0 while keeping ε, η, and r inside observational windows; without this the 'easily' qualifier remains unverified.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this point regarding the EGB compatibility analysis. The condition for c_T = 1 does constrain the tensor sector, but in the models examined the Gauss-Bonnet coupling continues to influence the background Friedmann equations and scalar perturbation dynamics, permitting adjustments to the slow-roll hierarchy that support α_s > 0. To address the request for explicit demonstration, we will revise the manuscript to include a concrete functional form for the coupling (e.g., an exponential or quadratic form satisfying the background constraint) together with numerical examples confirming that α_s > 0 is achieved while ε, η, and r remain within observational windows. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation remains independent of inputs

full rationale

The paper examines scalar-field, F(R), and Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet inflationary models, showing that positive spectral-index running is difficult in the first two classes but possible in GW170817-compatible EGB theories. No quoted equation or derivation step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, a self-defined quantity, or an unverified self-citation chain. The central claim rests on explicit model constructions whose slow-roll parameters and running are computed from the action and background equations rather than being presupposed by the compatibility condition itself. The analysis is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks such as the ACT and Planck data windows.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on abstract only; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are detailed. The analysis implicitly relies on standard assumptions of slow-roll inflation and modified gravity actions from prior literature.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5754 in / 1135 out tokens · 39355 ms · 2026-05-20T10:10:58.900447+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

145 extracted references · 145 canonical work pages · 55 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    So by combining the above withϵ 1 ≃ −ϵ 3, we get, r≃48ϵ 2 1 .(2.12) The slow-roll indexϵ 4 is defined as, ϵ4 = ¨FR H ˙FR = d dt FRR ˙R HF RR ˙R = FRRR ˙R2 +F RR d( ˙R) dt HF RR ˙R ,(2.13) and by using the slow-roll assumptions, Eqs. (2.14) and (2.13) and also, ˙R≃ −24H 3ϵ1 ,(2.14) we get, ϵ4 ≃ − 24FRRRH 2 FRR ϵ1 −3ϵ 1 + ˙ϵ1 Hϵ 1 ,(2.15) but ˙ϵ1 is, ˙ϵ1 =−...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Introduction to the theory of the early universe: Cosmological perturbations and inflationary theory,

    D. S. Gorbunov and V. A. Rubakov, “Introduction to the theory of the early universe: Cosmological perturbations and inflationary theory,” Hackensack, USA: World Scientific (2011) 489 p; 12

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Inflationary Cosmology after Planck 2013

    A. Linde, arXiv:1402.0526 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  4. [4]

    D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto, Phys. Rept.314(1999) 1 [hep-ph/9807278]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  5. [5]

    M. H. Abitbolet al.[Simons Observatory], Bull. Am. Astron. Soc.51(2019), 147 [arXiv:1907.08284 [astro- ph.IM]]

    work page arXiv 2019

  6. [6]

    Allyset al.[LiteBIRD], PTEP2023(2023) no.4, 042F01 doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac150 [arXiv:2202.02773 [astro-ph.IM]]

    E. Allyset al.[LiteBIRD], PTEP2023(2023) no.4, 042F01 doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac150 [arXiv:2202.02773 [astro-ph.IM]]

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac150 2023

  7. [7]

    S. Hild, M. Abernathy, F. Acernese, P. Amaro-Seoane, N. Andersson, K. Arun, F. Barone, B. Barr, M. Bar- suglia and M. Beker,et al.Class. Quant. Grav.28(2011), 094013 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/28/9/094013 [arXiv:1012.0908 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0264-9381/28/9/094013 2011

  8. [8]

    The Laser Interferometer Space Antenna: Unveiling the Millihertz Gravitational Wave Sky

    J. Baker, J. Bellovary, P. L. Bender, E. Berti, R. Caldwell, J. Camp, J. W. Conklin, N. Cornish, C. Cutler and R. DeRosa,et al.[arXiv:1907.06482 [astro-ph.IM]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1907

  9. [9]

    T. L. Smith and R. Caldwell, Phys. Rev. D100(2019) no.10, 104055 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.104055 [arXiv:1908.00546 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.104055 2019

  10. [10]

    Crowder and N

    J. Crowder and N. J. Cornish, Phys. Rev. D72(2005), 083005 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.083005 [arXiv:gr- qc/0506015 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.72.083005 2005

  11. [11]

    T. L. Smith and R. Caldwell, Phys. Rev. D95(2017) no.4, 044036 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.044036 [arXiv:1609.05901 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.95.044036 2017

  12. [12]

    N. Seto, S. Kawamura and T. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. Lett.87(2001), 221103 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.221103 [arXiv:astro-ph/0108011 [astro-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.87.221103 2001

  13. [13]

    Current status of space gravitational wave antenna DECIGO and B-DECIGO

    S. Kawamura, M. Ando, N. Seto, S. Sato, M. Musha, I. Kawano, J. Yokoyama, T. Tanaka, K. Ioka and T. Akutsu,et al.[arXiv:2006.13545 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  14. [14]

    Weltman, P

    A. Weltman, P. Bull, S. Camera, K. Kelley, H. Padmanabhan, J. Pritchard, A. Raccanelli, S. Riemer- Sørensen, L. Shao and S. Andrianomena,et al.Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral.37(2020), e002 doi:10.1017/pasa.2019.42 [arXiv:1810.02680 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1017/pasa.2019.42 2020

  15. [15]

    Auclairet al.[LISA Cosmology Working Group], [arXiv:2204.05434 [astro-ph.CO]]

    P. Auclairet al.[LISA Cosmology Working Group], [arXiv:2204.05434 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  16. [16]

    The NANOGrav 15-year Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-Wave Background

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acdac6 2023

  17. [17]

    Vagnozzi, JHEAp39(2023), 81-98 doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2023.07.001 [arXiv:2306.16912 [astro-ph.CO]]

    S. Vagnozzi, JHEAp39(2023), 81-98 doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2023.07.001 [arXiv:2306.16912 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2023.07.001 2023

  18. [18]

    V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.4, 043516 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.043516 [arXiv:2306.17351 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.043516 2023

  19. [19]

    The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Power Spectra, Likelihoods and $\Lambda$CDM Parameters

    T. Louiset al.[ACT], [arXiv:2503.14452 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  20. [20]

    The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Constraints on Extended Cosmological Models

    E. Calabreseet al.[ACT], [arXiv:2503.14454 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    A. G. Adameet al.[DESI], JCAP04(2025), 012 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/04/012 [arXiv:2404.03000 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/04/012 2025

  22. [22]

    D. H. Lee, W. Yang, E. Di Valentino, S. Pan and C. van de Bruck, [arXiv:2507.11432 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  23. [23]

    ¨Oz¨ ulker, E

    E. ¨Oz¨ ulker, E. Di Valentino and W. Giar` e, [arXiv:2506.19053 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  24. [24]

    D. A. Kessler, L. A. Escamilla, S. Pan and E. Di Valentino, [arXiv:2504.00776 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  25. [25]

    Nojiri, S

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov and V. K. Oikonomou, [arXiv:2506.21010 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv

  26. [26]

    Vagnozzi, Phys

    S. Vagnozzi, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) no.2, 023518 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.023518 [arXiv:1907.07569 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.023518 2020

  27. [27]

    Pedrotti, J

    D. Pedrotti, J. Q. Jiang, L. A. Escamilla, S. S. da Costa and S. Vagnozzi, Phys. Rev. D111(2025) no.2, 023506 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.023506 [arXiv:2408.04530 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.023506 2025

  28. [28]

    J. Q. Jiang, D. Pedrotti, S. S. da Costa and S. Vagnozzi, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no.12, 123519 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.123519 [arXiv:2408.02365 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.123519 2024

  29. [29]

    Vagnozzi, Universe9(2023) no.9, 393 doi:10.3390/universe9090393 [arXiv:2308.16628 [astro-ph.CO]]

    S. Vagnozzi, Universe9(2023) no.9, 393 doi:10.3390/universe9090393 [arXiv:2308.16628 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.3390/universe9090393 2023

  30. [30]

    S. A. Adil, ¨O. Akarsu, E. Di Valentino, R. C. Nunes, E. ¨Oz¨ ulker, A. A. Sen and E. Specogna, Phys. Rev. D 109(2024) no.2, 023527 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.023527 [arXiv:2306.08046 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.023527 2024

  31. [31]

    Bernui, E

    A. Bernui, E. Di Valentino, W. Giar` e, S. Kumar and R. C. Nunes, Phys. Rev. D107(2023) no.10, 103531 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.103531 [arXiv:2301.06097 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.103531 2023

  32. [32]

    Gariazzo, E

    S. Gariazzo, E. Di Valentino, O. Mena and R. C. Nunes, Phys. Rev. D106(2022) no.2, 023530 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.023530 [arXiv:2111.03152 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.023530 2022

  33. [33]

    Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation

    Y. Akramiet al.[Planck], Astron. Astrophys.641(2020), A10 doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833887 [arXiv:1807.06211 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833887 2020

  34. [34]

    P. A. R. Adeet al.[BICEP and Keck], Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) no.15, 151301 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.151301 [arXiv:2110.00483 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.151301 2021

  35. [35]

    Kallosh, A

    R. Kallosh, A. Linde and D. Roest, [arXiv:2503.21030 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv

  36. [36]

    Q. Gao, Y. Gong, Z. Yi and F. Zhang, [arXiv:2504.15218 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  37. [37]

    L. Liu, Z. Yi and Y. Gong, [arXiv:2505.02407 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  38. [38]

    Mohammadi, Q

    Yogesh, A. Mohammadi, Q. Wu and T. Zhu, [arXiv:2505.05363 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  39. [39]

    Z. Yi, X. Wang, Q. Gao and Y. Gong, [arXiv:2505.10268 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  40. [40]

    Z. Z. Peng, Z. C. Chen and L. Liu, [arXiv:2505.12816 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  41. [41]

    Yin, [arXiv:2505.03004 [hep-ph]]

    W. Yin, [arXiv:2505.03004 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  42. [42]

    C. T. Byrnes, M. Cortˆ es and A. R. Liddle, [arXiv:2505.09682 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  43. [43]

    W. J. Wolf, [arXiv:2506.12436 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  44. [44]

    S. Aoki, H. Otsuka and R. Yanagita, [arXiv:2504.01622 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  45. [45]

    Q. Gao, Y. Qian, Y. Gong and Z. Yi, [arXiv:2506.18456 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv

  46. [46]

    Zahoor, S

    M. Zahoor, S. Khan and I. A. Bhat, [arXiv:2507.18684 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  47. [47]

    E. G. M. Ferreira, E. McDonough, L. Balkenhol, R. Kallosh, L. Knox and A. Linde, [arXiv:2507.12459 [astro-ph.CO]]. 13

    work page arXiv

  48. [48]

    Mohammadi, Yogesh and A

    A. Mohammadi, Yogesh and A. Wang, [arXiv:2507.06544 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  49. [49]

    Choudhury, G

    S. Choudhury, G. Bauyrzhan, S. K. Singh and K. Yerzhanov, [arXiv:2506.15407 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  50. [50]

    S. D. Odintsov and V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Lett. B868(2025), 139779 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139779 [arXiv:2506.08193 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139779 2025

  51. [51]

    R. D. A. Q., J. Chagoya and A. A. Roque, [arXiv:2508.13273 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv

  52. [52]

    Y. Zhu, Q. Gao, Y. Gong and Z. Yi, [arXiv:2508.09707 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  53. [53]

    Kouniatalis and E

    G. Kouniatalis and E. N. Saridakis, [arXiv:2507.17721 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  54. [54]

    M. Hai, A. R. Kamal, N. F. Shamma and M. S. J. Shuvo, [arXiv:2506.08083 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv

  55. [55]

    Dioguardi, A

    C. Dioguardi, A. J. Iovino and A. Racioppi, Phys. Lett. B868(2025), 139664 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139664 [arXiv:2504.02809 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139664 2025

  56. [56]

    Yuennan, P

    J. Yuennan, P. Koad, F. Atamurotov and P. Channuie, [arXiv:2508.17263 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  57. [57]

    H. J. Kuralkar, S. Panda and A. Vidyarthi, [arXiv:2504.15061 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv

  58. [58]

    H. J. Kuralkar, S. Panda and A. Vidyarthi, JCAP05(2025), 073 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/05/073 [arXiv:2502.03573 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/05/073 2025

  59. [59]

    Modak, [arXiv:2509.02979 [astro-ph.CO]]

    T. Modak, [arXiv:2509.02979 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  60. [60]

    S. Aoki, H. Otsuka and R. Yanagita, [arXiv:2509.06739 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  61. [61]

    Inflation with Gauss-Bonnet Correction and Higgs Potential

    Z. Ahghari and M. Farhoudi, [arXiv:2512.12286 [gr-qc]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  62. [62]

    McDonough and E

    E. McDonough and E. G. M. Ferreira, [arXiv:2512.05108 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  63. [63]

    Chakraborty, M

    D. Chakraborty, M. Hai, S. T. Jahan, A. R. Kamal and M. S. J. Shuvo, [arXiv:2511.19610 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv

  64. [64]

    Noori Gashti, M

    S. Noori Gashti, M. A. S. Afshar, M. R. Alipour, B. Pourhassan and J. Sadeghi, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) no.11, 1343 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-15066-0

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-15066-0 2025

  65. [65]

    Yuennan, F

    J. Yuennan, F. Atamurotov and P. Channuie, [arXiv:2511.17216 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  66. [66]

    Deb and A

    B. Deb and A. Deshamukhya, [arXiv:2511.06453 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv

  67. [67]

    M. A. S. Afshar, S. Noori Gashti, M. R. Alipour, B. Pourhassan, I. Sakalli and J. Sadeghi, [arXiv:2510.20876 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  68. [68]

    Ellis, M

    J. Ellis, M. A. G. Garcia, K. A. Olive and S. Verner, [arXiv:2510.18656 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  69. [69]

    Iacconi, S

    L. Iacconi, S. Bhattacharya, M. Fasiello and D. Wands, [arXiv:2511.14673 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  70. [70]

    Yuennan, F

    J. Yuennan, F. Atamurotov and P. Channuie, Phys. Lett. B872(2026), 140065 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.140065 [arXiv:2509.23329 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.140065 2026

  71. [71]

    Q. Y. Wang, [arXiv:2512.10862 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  72. [72]

    Z. C. Qiu, Y. H. Pang and Q. G. Huang, [arXiv:2510.18320 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  73. [73]

    X. Wang, K. Kohri and T. T. Yanagida, [arXiv:2506.06797 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  74. [74]

    Reinterpretation of the Starobinsky model

    T. Asaka, S. Iso, H. Kawai, K. Kohri, T. Noumi and T. Terada, PTEP2016(2016) no.12, 123E01 doi:10.1093/ptep/ptw161 [arXiv:1507.04344 [hep-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/ptep/ptw161 2016

  75. [75]

    V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Lett. B871(2025), 139972 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139972 [arXiv:2508.17363 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139972 2025

  76. [76]

    Choudhury, S

    S. Choudhury, S. K. Singh and S. K. Sahoo, [arXiv:2511.19898 [gr-qc]]

    work page arXiv

  77. [77]

    S. K. Singh, [arXiv:2511.05545 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  78. [78]

    J. Kim, X. Wang, Y. l. Zhang and Z. Ren, JCAP09(2025), 011 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/09/011 [arXiv:2504.12035 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/09/011 2025

  79. [79]

    Z. Y. Peng, H. S. Yuan, Q. Lai, J. Q. Jiang, G. Ye, J. Zhang and Y. S. Piao, [arXiv:2601.14288 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page arXiv

  80. [80]

    The End of the First Act: Spectral Running, Interacting Dark Radiation, and the Hubble Tension in Light of ACT DR6 Data

    M. Garny, F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth, [arXiv:2604.26541 [astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

Showing first 80 references.