Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 46 references

Starobinsky inflation, via a Weyl-transformed dark photon, predicts that dark-photon dark matter has mass m in 5.6–7.4 µeV (frequency 1.4–1.8 GHz), a narrow band testable by haloscope searches.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 12:46 UTC pith:ZNPQQPR2

load-bearing objection Solid, careful calculation that gives Starobinsky inflation a falsifiable dark-photon mass window (5.6–7.4 µeV), but the window sits on an explicit Jordan-frame mass assumption that the paper states but does not defend. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.29149 v1 pith:ZNPQQPR2 submitted 2026-07-31 hep-ph astro-ph.COgr-qchep-ex

Dark Photon Dark Matter from Quantum Fluctuations during Starobinsky Inflation

Taiyo Kasamaki , Takeo Moroi This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.COgr-qchep-ex
keywords dark photondark matterStarobinsky inflationWeyl transformationinflationary quantum fluctuationslongitudinal modehaloscope searchesmicroelectronvolt mass
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper tries to establish that dark-photon dark matter can be produced from quantum fluctuations during Starobinsky inflation, and that the Weyl transformation required to reach the Einstein frame changes the answer dramatically. The Weyl factor Ω amplifies the longitudinal-mode power spectrum by roughly Ω²≈40 during horizon exit, so the relic abundance is much larger than earlier estimates. A precise numerical calculation then pins the dark-photon mass to 5.6–7.4 µeV, corresponding to an oscillation frequency of 1.4–1.8 GHz. A sympathetic reader should care because the paper turns a free parameter into a narrow, falsifiable prediction already targeted by haloscope experiments. It also shows that frame-dependent kinetic functions can control the relic abundance in this class of inflationary models.

Core claim

The central claim is that, within the framework considered, reproducing the observed dark-matter density fixes the dark-photon mass to 5.6 < m < 7.4 µeV. Because the Jordan-frame mass parameter m is assumed constant, the Einstein-frame effective mass becomes bm = m/Ω, where Ω ≈ exp(ϕ/√6 M_Pl) is the Weyl factor. The longitudinal mode's kinetic function varies during and after inflation, and its power spectrum acquires the factor Ω²(t_k). The resulting density parameter is approximately Ω_DM h² ≈ 0.15 (m/10 µeV)^{1/2} (Ω(t_k*)/10)² (H(t_k*)/10¹³ GeV)². Imposing the observed scalar amplitude, Ω_DM h² = 0.120 ± 0.001, and ΔN_eff < 0.30 yields m ∈ (5.6, 7.4) µeV, i.e., f ∈ (1.4, 1.8) GHz.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Weyl factor Ω = exp(ϕ/√6 M_Pl), which transforms the Jordan-frame metric into the Einstein-frame metric and turns a constant Jordan-frame dark-photon mass m into a time-dependent Einstein-frame mass bm = m/Ω. The longitudinal mode of the dark photon acquires an inflaton-dependent kinetic function, and this function amplifies the inflationary power spectrum by Ω²(t_k) ≈ 40. That amplification is what lowers the required dark-photon mass into the µeV range and makes the prediction experimentally reachable.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise, stated in §2 after Eq. (2.3), is that the dark-photon mass parameter is constant in the Jordan frame and independent of the inflaton; if the mass were instead defined in the Einstein frame, the Ω² enhancement would disappear and the mass window would shift by about two orders of magnitude.

What would settle it

A haloscope search that excludes dark-photon dark matter in 1.4–1.8 GHz, while Starobinsky inflation and the Jordan-frame-mass assumption remain, would refute the central claim; alternatively, an explicit ultraviolet model in which the mass parameter is constant in the Einstein frame would remove the Ω² enhancement and move the predicted window by about two orders of magnitude.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the paper is correct, dark-photon dark matter must appear at m ∈ (5.6, 7.4) µeV, i.e., f ∈ (1.4, 1.8) GHz, within the reach of current cavity-haloscope searches.
  • In any inflation model requiring a Weyl transformation to the Einstein frame, the relic abundance of longitudinally polarized dark photons is controlled by Ω(t_k) and H(t_k), not by H alone.
  • The density parameter scales as m^{1/2} Ω² H², so a future measurement of the dark-photon mass would indirectly probe the Hubble scale during inflation and the Weyl factor at horizon exit.
  • The dark-radiation constraint ΔN_eff < 0.30 restricts the inflaton's decay into dark photons; if the inflaton decays predominantly into the Standard Model, the mass window survives, otherwise the model is excluded.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If haloscopes see no dark photon in 1.4–1.8 GHz, the most natural fix would be to weaken the Jordan-frame-mass assumption—for example, by placing the mass in an Einstein-frame dark-Higgs or Stückelberg sector—which would shift the required mass by roughly two orders of magnitude.
  • The prediction is not unique to Starobinsky inflation: any Weyl-frame inflation model with comparable Ω(t_k) and H(t_k) will yield a similar window, so 1.4–1.8 GHz is a generic target for this production class.
  • A future detection in this window would corroborate the mechanism but would not uniquely identify Starobinsky inflation; distinguishing between models would require combining the mass measurement with other cosmological observables.
  • The formalism can be extended to non-standard post-inflationary histories, such as an early matter-dominated era, which would change the mapping between m and Ω_DM and could reopen a wider mass range.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper computes the relic abundance of dark-photon dark matter produced from inflationary vacuum fluctuations in Starobinsky inflation. Because Starobinsky inflation is formulated in a Jordan frame with an R+R^2 gravitational sector, moving to the Einstein frame via a Weyl transformation makes the dark-photon mass parameter time dependent, bm = m/Ω, where Ω depends on the inflaton. The authors derive the longitudinal-mode effective action, compute the curvature-perturbation-normalized power spectrum with slow-roll corrections, evolve the mode functions through inflation and reheating using an adiabatic-invariant method, and impose constraints from the observed dark-matter abundance, the scalar amplitude, and ΔN_eff. Their central quantitative result is Ω_DM h² ≈ 0.15 (m/10 μeV)^{1/2} (Ω(t_{k*})/10)^2 (H(t_{k*})/10^13 GeV)^2, which, combined with the Starobinsky model parameters consistent with Planck, gives a dark-photon mass window 5.6 < m < 7.4 μeV (1.4–1.8 GHz).

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a concrete, falsifiable target mass for haloscope searches and extends the Graham–Mardon–Rajendran mechanism to a realistic single-field inflationary model with a nontrivial Weyl factor. The derivation is systematic: the Weyl transformation in §2 is handled carefully, the canonical rescaling leading to Eq. (3.15) is explicit, and the post-inflation evolution is treated with a well-defined switching procedure between direct integration and the adiabatic invariant I(t). The numerical pipeline is transparent enough to be reproduced. However, the headline prediction is conditional on a specific model-building choice for the origin of the dark-photon mass; the size of the enhancement and hence the quoted mass range depend on that choice.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2 after Eq. (2.3); §4 Eq. (4.34)] The central mass window is controlled by the assumption that the dark-photon mass parameter m is constant in the Jordan frame and independent of the inflaton. Under the Weyl transformation this becomes bm = m/Ω in the Einstein frame, leading to the Ω²(t_k) enhancement in the power spectrum (3.15) and, through Eq. (4.34), to the 5.6–7.4 μeV window. If, instead, the mass is constant in the Einstein frame (e.g., from a dark-Higgs or Stückelberg sector whose vev is fixed in that frame), the Ω² enhancement disappears and the required mass moves to roughly the meV scale, about two orders of magnitude above the quoted band. The assumption is explicitly stated in §2, but the abstract and conclusions present the range with only the phrase 'within the framework considered.' I request a dedicated discussion of the physical origin of the mass term and an estimate of the Einstein-frame-constant-mass
  2. [§5 Conclusions] The conclusion states that 'the dark-photon DM mass is predicted to lie in the range 5.6 < m < 7.4 μeV' without restating the Jordan-frame-condition on the mass term. Because haloscope collaborations may use this band as a scanning target, the framing should not overstate the generality. This is related to the previous point but is a distinct presentation issue in the paper's primary takeaway.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3.1] Typo: 'Strarobinsky' in the opening sentence of §3.1 should be 'Starobinsky.'
  2. [§2 around Eq. (2.9)] The notation using absolute values enclosing vector expressions in Eq. (2.9) is terse; a short sentence clarifying that |...|² denotes the sum of squared components would improve readability.
  3. [§4 Eq. (4.34)] The symbol k* is first used in Eq. (4.34) but defined only in the text near Fig. 1. A one-line reminder at first use would help the reader.
  4. [§3.2 Eq. (3.33)] The definition of ΔN_eff should explicitly connect ρ_DR to the standard N_eff convention, since the prefactor and neutrino-temperature normalization are central to the constraint. The current expression is dimensionally correct, but a one-line explanation of the normalization would avoid ambiguity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No material circularity: the mass window is inferred from externally fixed Ω_DM h^2 using a self-contained mode-evolution calculation; the only overlapping self-citation is peripheral.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. The power spectrum (3.15) is computed in the Appendix from the canonically normalized mode, the Bunch-Davies initial condition (A.7), and the Hankel solution (A.12); its normalization is not calibrated to the dark-matter abundance. The relic-density formula (4.34) is obtained by solving the mode equation (2.29) with the superhorizon initial condition (2.32) and using the I-based evolution (3.30), with the coefficient 0.15 arising from the numerical integration rather than from fitting the target result. The dark-photon mass is then inferred by imposing the externally measured Ω_DM h^2 = 0.120±0.001, A_s = (2.100±0.030)×10^-9, and ΔN_eff < 0.30; this is a standard inverse-problem determination, not a prediction of a quantity already contained in the inputs. The Jordan-frame constant-mass assumption stated in Section 2 is explicit and is a model premise, not a circular reduction: the Einstein-frame time-dependent mass (2.6) and the Ω^2 enhancement follow from the Weyl transformation. The only overlapping self-citation is Ref. [38] for the inflaton decay width Γ_{φ→AA}, used for the ΔN_eff constraint; this is peripheral to the central power-spectrum and abundance calculation, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work. Thus no circular step is identified.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The computation is parameter-free once (m_ϕ, Γ_ϕ→SM, m) are fixed; these three are pinned down by three external anchors (A_s, ΔN_eff, Ω_DM h²). The dominant ledger item is the Jordan-frame-constant mass assumption, which generates the Weyl enhancement; it is reasonable but not forced by Starobinsky inflation itself. No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • m_ϕ (inflaton mass parameter in V(ϕ), Eq. (3.8)) = ≈ 2.6–3.8 × 10¹³ GeV (band consistent with A_s = (2.100 ± 0.030) × 10⁻⁹); benchmark 3 × 10¹³ GeV
    Sets the scale of the Starobinsky potential and hence H during inflation; the observed CMB amplitude A_s fixes it (red bands in Figs. 2–3). Not predicted by the framework itself.
  • Γ_ϕ→SM (inflaton decay width into Standard Model states) = scanned over ~10⁰–10¹⁰ GeV; excluded below ~10²–10³ GeV by ΔN_eff < 0.30
    Introduced explicitly as a free parameter (§3.1: 'we treat Γ_ϕ→SM as a free parameter'); controls the reheating history, which sets the e-fold counts N_e(t_pivot) and N_e(t_k*) that enter A_s and Ω_DM h².
  • m (dark-photon mass) = 5.6–7.4 µeV (output range)
    Input mass parameter of the Jordan-frame Lagrangian (2.3); the paper scans it and reports the range for which the predicted abundance matches the observed Ω_DM h² = 0.120 ± 0.0012 together with the A_s and ΔN_eff constraints. This is a transparent calibration, but m is nevertheless an input chosen to fit the central observable.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption The dark-photon mass term is a constant m in the Jordan frame, independent of the inflaton; the Einstein-frame effective mass is bm = m/Ω
    Sec. 2, after Eq. (2.3): 'We assume that, in the Jordan-frame Lagrangian, the mass term of the dark photon does not depend explicitly on the inflaton field.' The entire Ω² enhancement of the power spectrum (3.15) and the factor ~10²⁻³ reduction of the required mass rest on this frame choice.
  • domain assumption The dark-photon kinetic term is minimal; no R F², R_μν A^μ A^ν, or inflaton-vector derivative couplings
    Eq. (2.3) contains only −¼F² + ½m²A². Non-minimal gravitational couplings are known to source vector production during inflation independently and would change the abundance.
  • domain assumption Standard post-inflationary history: inflaton oscillates in a quadratic-dominated potential, decays with width Γ_ϕ→SM, rapid thermalization, radiation domination until matter-radiation equality
    Sec. 3.2, Eqs. (3.19)–(3.26). The paper itself notes (Sec. 5, citing Refs [23,24]) that the abundance is sensitive to this history; non-standard phases would shift the window.
  • standard math Bunch–Davies vacuum and the dS mode-function computation, including O(ε^{1/2}) slow-roll corrections with ν = 3/2 + √(ε/3)
    Appendix, Eqs. (A.7)–(A.13); standard QFT in de Sitter (Ref [36]) and Stewart–Lyth slow-roll results (Ref [40]).
  • domain assumption Classicalization of superhorizon modes and frozen evolution ∂_t Ã_L ≃ 0 until horizon reentry
    Eqs. (2.21)–(2.22) and (2.32); standard in this literature, justified by the overdamped attractor, but stochastic/diffusion and decay corrections are not quantified.
  • standard math Inflaton decay rates Γ_ϕ→HH (3.17), Γ_ϕ→AA (3.18), and the SM thermodynamic functions g_*, g_*s
    Refs [37,38,39]. Γ_ϕ→AA = m_ϕ³/(192πM_Pl²) sets the dark-radiation constraint; taken from prior published computations.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-daily-deepseek · 13757 in / 44456 out tokens · 441392 ms · 2026-08-03T12:46:44.099176+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present a detailed investigation of scenarios in which dark-photon dark matter is produced from quantum fluctuations during inflation. In particular, we focus on inflationary models that necessarily involve a Weyl transformation, dependent on the inflaton amplitude, in order to move to the Einstein frame. In such models, the kinetic function of the longitudinal mode of the dark photon varies throughout, and even after, the inflationary period. We show that this variation of the kinetic function has a substantial impact on the resulting relic abundance of dark photons. As a representative and phenomenologically important example, we analyze the Starobinsky inflation model, for which we perform an accurate computation of the relic dark-photon abundance. By imposing the relevant observational constraints, we find that, in order to reproduce the observed dark-matter density in the present Universe, the dark-photon mass must lie in the range $5.6 < m < 7.4\,\mu\mathrm{eV}$ within the framework considered in this work.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.29149 by Taiyo Kasamaki, Takeo Moroi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Energy density spectrum of the dark photon, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Contours of the scalar amplitude As and the present dark-photon abundance ΩDMh 2 in the mϕ vs. Γϕ→SM plane. The dark-photon mass is fixed at m = 7 µeV. The red shaded band shows the region consistent with the observational constraint (i.e., As is within (2.100 ± 0.030) × 10−9 [1]). The gray shaded region (∆Neff > 0.30) is excluded due to the overproduction of the dark radiation. In the same figure, we also… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Contours of the scalar amplitude As and the dark-photon mass m in the mϕ vs. Γϕ→SM plane. The dark-photon mass m is fixed by imposing ΩDMh 2 = 0.12. The red shaded band shows the region consistent with the observational constraint (i.e., As is within (2.100 ± 0.030) × 10−9 [1]). The gray shaded region (∆Neff > 0.30) is excluded due to the overproduction of the dark radiation. that the contours of As and ΩD… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 42 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Planck collaboration,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6 [1807.06209]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  2. [2]

    Feng,Dark Matter Candidates from Particle Physics and Methods of Detection, Ann

    J.L. Feng,Dark Matter Candidates from Particle Physics and Methods of Detection, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.48(2010) 495 [1003.0904]. 18

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  3. [3]

    Cirelli, A

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia and J. Zupan,Dark Matter,2406.01705

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  4. [4]

    Graham, J

    P.W. Graham, J. Mardon and S. Rajendran,Vector Dark Matter from Inflationary Fluctuations,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 103520 [1504.02102]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  5. [5]

    Jaeckel, J

    J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald,Signatures of a hidden cosmic microwave background,Phys. Rev. Lett.101(2008) 131801 [0804.4157]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  6. [6]

    Pospelov, A

    M. Pospelov, A. Ritz and M.B. Voloshin,Bosonic super-WIMPs as keV-scale dark matter,Phys. Rev. D78(2008) 115012 [0807.3279]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  7. [7]

    Redondo and M

    J. Redondo and M. Postma,Massive hidden photons as lukewarm dark matter,JCAP 02(2009) 005 [0811.0326]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  8. [8]

    Nelson and J

    A.E. Nelson and J. Scholtz,Dark Light, Dark Matter and the Misalignment Mechanism,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 103501 [1105.2812]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  9. [9]

    Arias, D

    P. Arias, D. Cadamuro, M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald,WISPy Cold Dark Matter,JCAP06(2012) 013 [1201.5902]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  10. [10]

    H. An, M. Pospelov and J. Pradler,New stellar constraints on dark photons,Phys. Lett. B725(2013) 190 [1302.3884]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  11. [11]

    Redondo and G

    J. Redondo and G. Raffelt,Solar constraints on hidden photons re-visited,JCAP08 (2013) 034 [1305.2920]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  12. [12]

    Tang and Y.-L

    Y. Tang and Y.-L. Wu,On Thermal Gravitational Contribution to Particle Production and Dark Matter,Phys. Lett. B774(2017) 676 [1708.05138]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  13. [13]

    Garny, A

    M. Garny, A. Palessandro, M. Sandora and M.S. Sloth,Theory and Phenomenology of Planckian Interacting Massive Particles as Dark Matter,JCAP02(2018) 027 [1709.09688]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  14. [14]

    Agrawal, N

    P. Agrawal, N. Kitajima, M. Reece, T. Sekiguchi and F. Takahashi,Relic Abundance of Dark Photon Dark Matter,Phys. Lett. B801(2020) 135136 [1810.07188]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  15. [15]

    J.A. Dror, K. Harigaya and V. Narayan,Parametric Resonance Production of Ultralight Vector Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 035036 [1810.07195]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  16. [16]

    R.T. Co, A. Pierce, Z. Zhang and Y. Zhao,Dark Photon Dark Matter Produced by Axion Oscillations,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 075002 [1810.07196]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  17. [17]

    Bastero-Gil, J

    M. Bastero-Gil, J. Santiago, L. Ubaldi and R. Vega-Morales,Vector dark matter production at the end of inflation,JCAP04(2019) 015 [1810.07208]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  18. [18]

    Long and L.-T

    A.J. Long and L.-T. Wang,Dark Photon Dark Matter from a Network of Cosmic Strings,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 063529 [1901.03312]. 19

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  19. [19]

    Y. Ema, K. Nakayama and Y. Tang,Production of purely gravitational dark matter: the case of fermion and vector boson,JHEP07(2019) 060 [1903.10973]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  20. [20]

    Nakayama,Vector Coherent Oscillation Dark Matter,JCAP10(2019) 019 [1907.06243]

    K. Nakayama,Vector Coherent Oscillation Dark Matter,JCAP10(2019) 019 [1907.06243]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  21. [21]

    Nakayama,Constraint on Vector Coherent Oscillation Dark Matter with Kinetic Function,JCAP08(2020) 033 [2004.10036]

    K. Nakayama,Constraint on Vector Coherent Oscillation Dark Matter with Kinetic Function,JCAP08(2020) 033 [2004.10036]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  22. [22]

    Nakai, R

    Y. Nakai, R. Namba and Z. Wang,Light Dark Photon Dark Matter from Inflation, JHEP12(2020) 170 [2004.10743]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Ahmed, B

    A. Ahmed, B. Grzadkowski and A. Socha,Gravitational production of vector dark matter,JHEP08(2020) 059 [2005.01766]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    Kolb and A.J

    E.W. Kolb and A.J. Long,Completely dark photons from gravitational particle production during the inflationary era,JHEP03(2021) 283 [2009.03828]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  25. [25]

    Salehian, M.A

    B. Salehian, M.A. Gorji, H. Firouzjahi and S. Mukohyama,Vector dark matter production from inflation with symmetry breaking,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 063526 [2010.04491]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  26. [26]

    Firouzjahi, M.A

    H. Firouzjahi, M.A. Gorji, S. Mukohyama and B. Salehian,Dark photon dark matter from charged inflaton,JHEP06(2021) 050 [2011.06324]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  27. [27]

    Nakayama and W

    K. Nakayama and W. Yin,Hidden photon and axion dark matter from symmetry breaking,JHEP10(2021) 026 [2105.14549]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  28. [28]

    Q.-Y. Wang, Y. Tang and Y.-L. Wu,Dark matter production in Weyl R2 inflation, Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 023502 [2203.15452]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  29. [29]

    T. Sato, F. Takahashi and M. Yamada,Gravitational production of dark photon dark matter with mass generated by the Higgs mechanism,JCAP08(2022) 022 [2204.11896]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  30. [30]

    Redi and A

    M. Redi and A. Tesi,Dark photon Dark Matter without Stueckelberg mass,JHEP10 (2022) 167 [2204.14274]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  31. [31]

    Nakai, R

    Y. Nakai, R. Namba and I. Obata,Peaky production of light dark photon dark matter, JCAP08(2023) 032 [2212.11516]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    Kitajima and K

    N. Kitajima and K. Nakayama,Dark photon dark matter from cosmic strings and gravitational wave background,JHEP08(2023) 068 [2212.13573]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  33. [33]

    Gan and D

    X. Gan and D. Liu,Cosmologically varying kinetic mixing,JHEP11(2023) 031 [2302.03056]. 20

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  34. [34]

    Kitajima and K

    N. Kitajima and K. Nakayama,Viable vector coherent oscillation dark matter,JCAP 07(2023) 014 [2303.04287]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  35. [35]

    Starobinsky,A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity, Phys

    A.A. Starobinsky,A New Type of Isotropic Cosmological Models Without Singularity, Phys. Lett. B91(1980) 99

    1980

  36. [36]

    Bunch and P.C.W

    T.S. Bunch and P.C.W. Davies,Quantum Field Theory in de Sitter Space: Renormalization by Point Splitting,Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A360(1978) 117

    1978

  37. [37]

    Gorbunov and A

    D. Gorbunov and A. Tokareva,R 2-inflation with conformal SM Higgs field,JCAP12 (2013) 021 [1212.4466]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  38. [38]

    Q. Li, T. Moroi, K. Nakayama and W. Yin,Hidden dark matter from Starobinsky inflation,JHEP09(2021) 179 [2105.13358]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    Saikawa and S

    K. Saikawa and S. Shirai,Primordial gravitational waves, precisely: The role of thermodynamics in the Standard Model,JCAP05(2018) 035 [1803.01038]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  40. [40]

    Stewart and D.H

    E.D. Stewart and D.H. Lyth,A More accurate analytic calculation of the spectrum of cosmological perturbations produced during inflation,Phys. Lett. B302(1993) 171 [gr-qc/9302019]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  41. [41]

    Berlin and Y

    A. Berlin and Y. Kahn,New Technologies for Axion and Dark Photon Searches,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.75(2025) 83 [2412.08704]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Atacama Cosmology Telescope collaboration,The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 power spectra, likelihoods andΛCDM parameters,JCAP11(2025) 062 [2503.14452]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Atacama Cosmology Telescope collaboration,The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 constraints on extended cosmological models,JCAP11(2025) 063 [2503.14454]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    Kallosh, A

    R. Kallosh, A. Linde and D. Roest,Atacama Cosmology Telescope, South Pole Telescope, and Chaotic Inflation,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 161001 [2503.21030]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    Gialamas, T

    I.D. Gialamas, T. Katsoulas and K. Tamvakis,Keeping the relation between the Starobinsky model and no-scale supergravity ACTive,JCAP09(2025) 060 [2505.03608]

    arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    Kasamaki and T

    T. Kasamaki and T. Moroi, work in progress. 21