AG-2024.07-026·astro-ph.CO·cross-listed: gr-qc
Precision Inflationary Predictions: Impact of Accurate End-of-Inflation Dynamics
Authors
- Debottam NandiVIT Chennai
- Simran YadavUniversity of Delhi
- Manjeet KaurUniversity of Delhi
Abstract
The precision era of cosmology demands accurate theoretical predictions from inflationary models. In quantitative reheating analyses, inflationary observables depend sensitively on the number of e-folds between horizon exit and the end of inflation, $N_k$, whose determination relies on slow-roll approximations near the end of inflation. Since inflation ends when the first slow-roll parameter reaches unity, even modest inaccuracies in this approximation can shift the end of inflation and thereby alter $N_k$, leading to modifications in predicted observables -- including those evaluated at leading order. While such effects are implicit in standard treatments, their quantitative impact on observable constraints has not been systematically assessed. In this work, we first re-evaluate leading-order slow-roll predictions using an improved determination of $N_k$ within a simple quantitative reheating framework, and then incorporate higher-order slow-roll corrections consistently with the revised background evolution. Applying this framework to the Starobinsky model, we find that improved end-of-inflation dynamics alone can induce shifts of order $Δn_s \sim 10^{-3}$, while higher-order slow-roll corrections provide additional refinements at the $\sim 4 \times 10^{-4}$ level. The cumulative effect results in a maximum shift of $Δn_s \sim 1.2 \times 10^{-3}$ within the allowed reheating range. These results demonstrate that an accurate determination of the end of inflation is essential for precision tests of inflationary models.
Submitted
1 July 20241 year ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2407.01713
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.