1:
2: \documentclass[aps,prd,twocolumn,groupedaddress, showpacs]{revtex4} % 2 columns
3: %\documentclass[aps,prd,preprint,groupedaddress, showpacs]{revtex4} % 1 column
4:
5: \usepackage{graphicx}
6:
7: \begin{document}
8:
9: % Use the \preprint command to place your local institutional report
10: % number in the upper righthand corner of the title page in preprint mode.
11: % Multiple \preprint commands are allowed.
12: % Use the 'preprintnumbers' class option to override journal defaults
13: % to display numbers if necessary
14: % \preprint{}
15:
16: \title{Large curvature perturbations near horizon crossing \\
17: in single-field inflation models}
18:
19: % repeat the \author .. \affiliation etc. as needed
20: % \email, \thanks, \homepage, \altaffiliation all apply to the current
21: % author. Explanatory text should go in the []'s, actual e-mail
22: % address or url should go in the {}'s for \email and \homepage.
23: % Please use the appropriate macro foreach each type of information
24:
25: % \affiliation command applies to all authors since the last
26: % \affiliation command. The \affiliation command should follow the
27: % other information
28: % \affiliation can be followed by \email, \homepage, \thanks as well.
29:
30: \author{Edgar Bugaev}
31: \email[e-mail: ]{bugaev@pcbai10.inr.ruhep.ru}
32: %\homepage[]{Your web page}
33: %\thanks{}
34: %\altaffiliation{}
35:
36: \author{Peter Klimai}
37: \email[e-mail: ]{pklimai@gmail.com}
38: %\homepage[]{Your web page}
39: %\thanks{}
40: %\altaffiliation{}
41: \affiliation{Institute for Nuclear Research, Russian Academy of
42: Sciences, 60th October Anniversary Prospect 7a, 117312 Moscow,
43: Russia}
44:
45: %Collaboration name if desired (requires use of superscriptaddress
46: %option in \documentclass). \noaffiliation is required (may also be
47: %used with the \author command).
48: %\collaboration can be followed by \email, \homepage, \thanks as well.
49: %\collaboration{}
50: %\noaffiliation
51:
52: % !-! We do not put date to arXiv
53: %\date{\today}
54:
55: \begin{abstract}
56: We consider the examples of single-field inflation models
57: predicting large amplitudes of the curvature perturbation power
58: spectrum at relatively small scales. It is shown that in models
59: with an inflationary potential of double-well type the peaks in
60: the power spectrum, having, in maximum, the amplitude ${\cal
61: P}_{\cal R} \sim 0.1$, can exist (if parameters of the potential
62: are chosen appropriately). It is shown also that the spectrum
63: amplitude of the same magnitude (at large $k$ values) is predicted
64: in the model with the running mass potential, if the positive
65: running, $n'$, exists and is about $0.005$ at cosmological scales. Estimates of the
66: quantum diffusion effects during inflation in models with the
67: running mass potential are given.
68: \end{abstract}
69:
70: % insert suggested PACS numbers in braces on next line
71: \pacs{98.80.Cq, 04.70.-s \hfill arXiv:0806.4541 [astro-ph]}
72: % 98.80.Cq = Particle-theory and field-theory models of the early Universe
73: % 04.70.-s = Physics of black holes
74:
75: % insert suggested keywords - APS authors don't need to do this
76: %\keywords{}
77:
78: %\maketitle must follow title, authors, abstract, \pacs, and \keywords
79: \maketitle
80:
81: % body of paper here - Use proper section commands
82: % References should be done using the \cite, \ref, and \label commands
83: % \section{}
84: % Put \label in argument of \section for cross-referencing
85: %\section{\label{}}
86:
87:
88: % If in two-column mode, this environment will change to single-column
89: % format so that long equations can be displayed. Use
90: % sparingly.
91: %\begin{widetext}
92: % put long equation here
93: %\end{widetext}
94:
95: % figures should be put into the text as floats.
96: % Use the graphics or graphicx packages (distributed with LaTeX2e)
97: % and the \includegraphics macro defined in those packages.
98: % See the LaTeX Graphics Companion by Michel Goosens, Sebastian Rahtz,
99: % and Frank Mittelbach for instance.
100: %
101: % Here is an example of the general form of a figure:
102: % Fill in the caption in the braces of the \caption{} command. Put the label
103: % that you will use with \ref{} command in the braces of the \label{} command.
104: % Use the figure* environment if the figure should span across the
105: % entire page. There is no need to do explicit centering.
106:
107: %\begin{figure}
108: %\includegraphics{DW-bkg.eps}%
109: %\caption{\label{111}}
110: %\end{figure}
111:
112: % Surround figure environment with turnpage environment for landscape
113: % figure
114: % \begin{turnpage}
115: % \begin{figure}
116: % \includegraphics{}%
117: % \caption{\label{}}
118: % \end{figure}
119: % \end{turnpage}
120:
121: % tables should appear as floats within the text
122: %
123: % Here is an example of the general form of a table:
124: % Fill in the caption in the braces of the \caption{} command. Put the label
125: % that you will use with \ref{} command in the braces of the \label{} command.
126: % Insert the column specifiers (l, r, c, d, etc.) in the empty braces of the
127: % \begin{tabular}{} command.
128: % The ruledtabular enviroment adds doubled rules to table and sets a
129: % reasonable default table settings.
130: % Use the table* environment to get a full-width table in two-column
131: % Add \usepackage{longtable} and the longtable (or longtable*}
132: % environment for nicely formatted long tables. Or use the the [H]
133: % placement option to break a long table (with less control than
134: % in longtable).
135: % \begin{table}%[H] add [H] placement to break table across pages
136: % \caption{\label{}}
137: % \begin{ruledtabular}
138: % \begin{tabular}{}
139: % Lines of table here ending with \\
140: % \end{tabular}
141: % \end{ruledtabular}
142: % \end{table}
143:
144: % Surround table environment with turnpage environment for landscape
145: % table
146: % \begin{turnpage}
147: % \begin{table}
148: % \caption{\label{}}
149: % \begin{ruledtabular}
150: % \begin{tabular}{}
151: % \end{tabular}
152: % \end{ruledtabular}
153: % \end{table}
154: % \end{turnpage}
155:
156: % Specify following sections are appendices. Use \appendix* if there
157: % only one appendix.
158: %\appendix
159: %\section{}
160:
161: \section{Introduction}
162:
163: In last few months several papers appeared \cite{Kohri:2007gq,
164: Kohri:2007qn, Saito:2008em, Peiris:2008be}, in which single-field
165: inflation models predicting (potentially) large amplitudes of the
166: curvature perturbations on relatively small scales are discussed.
167: It is shown in \cite{Kohri:2007gq} that large class of such models
168: exists, namely, the models with a potential of hill-top type (the
169: idea of the hill-top inflation was proposed, to author's
170: knowledge, in the earlier work \cite{Boubekeur:2005zm}). In such
171: models, the potential can be of concave-downward form at
172: cosmological scales (in accordance with data) and be much flatter
173: at the end of inflation when small scales leave horizon.
174: Correspondingly, the amplitude of the perturbation power spectrum
175: can be rather large. It is noticed in \cite{Kohri:2007gq} that the
176: running mass model, having the potential with the similar
177: behavior, also can predict the large spectrum amplitude.
178:
179: Authors of \cite{Kohri:2007qn} discuss also more general scenarios
180: of producing large amplitudes of perturbation spectrum. They show
181: the limitedness of the standard procedure of the potential
182: reconstruction which can easily miss the potentials leading to
183: large spectrum amplitude and to noticeable primordial black hole
184: (PBH) production.
185:
186: In the recent paper \cite{Saito:2008em} it was shown that PBH
187: production is possible in single-field models of two-stage type
188: ("chaotic $+$ new"). The idea was proposed ten years ago in
189: \cite{Yokoyama:1998pt}. Authors of \cite{Saito:2008em} carried out
190: the numerical calculation of the power spectrum using the
191: Coleman-Weinberg (CW) potential.
192:
193: In the present paper we continue a study of the problems discussed
194: in the previous works \cite{Kohri:2007gq, Kohri:2007qn,
195: Saito:2008em}. We investigated thoroughly, as a particular
196: example, the model of two-stage inflation with a potential of the
197: double-well (DW) form, and showed that the characteristic features
198: of the power spectrum in models of this type (such as an amplitude
199: and a position of the peak, a degree of tuning of parameters of
200: the potential) are very sensitive to an exact form of the
201: potential. Further, we carried out the numerical calculation of
202: the power spectrum in a running mass model and showed that the
203: spectrum amplitude at small scales can be rather large. Our
204: calculation differs from the previous one \cite{Leach:2000ea} in
205: several aspects: we express the results through the values of
206: parameters $s$, $c$, which are used nowadays and prove to be very
207: convenient for a comparison with data; we studied, in details, the
208: difference in predictions of slow-roll and numerical approaches at
209: high $k$-values; we exactly specified the value of the positive
210: running, $n'$, which corresponds to our spectrum prediction. In
211: the final part of the work we investigated the quantum diffusion
212: effects in a model with the running mass potential.
213:
214: A plan of the paper is as follows. In the
215: second section we study predictions of two-stage inflation models
216: with DW and CW potentials, with accent on a mechanism of the
217: formation of peaks in the power spectrum. In the Sec. \ref{sec-RM}
218: all aspects connected with an obtaining of the predictions of
219: running mass inflation models are discussed. In the Sec.
220: \ref{sec-Concl} we present our main conclusions.
221:
222: %\bigskip
223: %
224: %Primordial density perturbation can be expressed in terms of the
225: %intrinsic curvature perturbation on comoving hypersurfaces $\cal
226: %R$ \cite{Lukash2}, given by
227: %\begin{equation}
228: %{\cal R} = R - \frac{H}{\dot \phi} \delta \phi \;,
229: %\end{equation}
230: %during inflation, where $\phi$ is the inflaton field, $R$ is the
231: %scalar describing the spatial curvature in the perturbed line
232: %element around a FLRW universe, and dot denotes the derivative
233: %over cosmic time $t$. The standard result for the power spectrum
234: %of the curvature perturbation to leading order in the slow-roll
235: %approximation is
236:
237: %Recently, the power spectrum and spectral index were calculated
238: %with taking into account second order corrections
239: %\cite{Gong:2001he}.
240:
241: %For an accurate numerical calculation of the power spectrum, it is
242: %quite convenient to use the formalism of gauge invariant
243: %cosmological perturbation theory \cite{Lukash2, Mukhanov2,
244: %Sasaki:1986hm}. The curvature perturbation $\cal R$ can be written
245: %using the new variable $u$ \cite{Lukash2, Mukhanov2,
246: %Sasaki:1986hm}, as
247: %\begin{equation}
248: %{\cal R} = \frac{u}{z} \;\;\; , \;\;\; %
249: %u \equiv a \left(\delta \phi - \frac{\dot \phi}{H} R \right) \;\;\; , \;\;\; %
250: %z \equiv \frac{a \dot \phi}{H} \;\; . \label{Ruz}
251: %\end{equation}
252: %It follows from eq. (\ref{Ruz}) that in the spatially flat gauge
253: %(where $R=0$) one has
254: %\begin{equation}
255: %u = a \delta \phi \;\;\; , \;\;\; %
256: %{\cal R} = H \frac {\delta \phi} {\dot \phi} \;\; . \label{uR}
257: %\end{equation}
258: %The physical sense of the variable $u$ is clear from eq.
259: %(\ref{uR}): $u/a$ is the inflaton field perturbation in the
260: %spatially flat gauge. The curvature perturbation, as a function of
261: %the conformal time $\tau$, is the solution of the differential
262: %equation (prime denotes the derivative over $\tau$)
263:
264: %Here, ${\cal R}_k$ is the Fourier component of ${\cal R}$,
265: %\begin{equation}
266: %{\cal R}_k(\tau) = \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^3} \int e^{-i \vec k \vec x}
267: %{\cal R}(\vec x,\tau) d^3 x .
268: %\end{equation}
269:
270: %Sometimes it is more convenient to use the usual time $t$ instead
271: %of $\tau$. In this case, the equation for ${\cal R}_k$ is
272: %\begin{equation}
273: %\ddot {\cal R}_k + H \dot {\cal R}_k (3+2\epsilon - 2 \eta) +
274: %\frac{k^2}{a^2} {\cal R}_k = 0 \;.
275: %\end{equation}
276:
277:
278: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
279: \begin{figure}
280: \includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{DW-bkg.eps} %
281: \center \caption{ \label{DWbkg} The solution of the background
282: equation for inflation with the double-well potential (\ref{DW}).
283: The parameters of the
284: potential are: $v = 0.16286748 m_{Pl}, \lambda=1.7\times 10^{-13}$.} %
285: \end{figure}
286: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
287: \begin{figure}[!t]
288: \includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{epst.eps}
289: \includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{epsdelt.eps}
290: \center %
291: \caption{ \label{DWed} The time dependence of the parameter
292: $\epsilon$ and the combination $1+\epsilon-\eta$ corresponding to
293: the background field evolution
294: shown in fig. \ref{DWbkg} } %
295: \end{figure}
296: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
297:
298: \section{Examples of the power spectrum with peaks}
299:
300: \subsection{Double-well potential}
301:
302: This form of the inflaton potential having an unstable local
303: maximum at the origin has been discussed many times in studies of
304: eternal and new inflation. The main problem was to realize the
305: initial condition for the new inflation when system starts from a
306: top of the hill. Ten years ago the model of "chaotic new
307: inflation" has been proposed \cite{Yokoyama:1998pt}, in which the
308: system climbs on the top during dynamical evolution of the
309: inflaton field with initial conditions coinciding with those of
310: chaotic inflation models. In the approach of
311: \cite{Yokoyama:1998pt} the inflation has two stages, chaotic and
312: new, and during transition from the first stage to the second the
313: slow-roll conditions break down (in general).
314:
315: The potential has two parameters:
316: \begin{equation}
317: V(\phi) = \frac{\lambda}{4} (\phi^2-v^2)^2 \;. \label{DW}
318: \end{equation}
319: The inflaton starts with the rather high value of $\phi$ (we take
320: $\phi_{\rm in} \sim 5 m_{Pl}$) and rolls down to the origin. The
321: parameter $\lambda$ is fixed by a normalization of the power
322: spectrum on experimental data, $\lambda \sim 10^{-13}$. The
323: evolution of the system strongly depends on the value of $v$: if
324: $v$ is finely tuned, $\phi$ can spend some time near the origin,
325: i.e. on the top, and then roll down to one of the two minima. In
326: figs. \ref{DWbkg} and \ref{DWed}a the time evolution for the
327: inflaton and the parameter $\epsilon$ for the definite values of
328: the parameters $\lambda$ , $v$ are shown. One can see that,
329: really, $\phi \approx 0$ at some period of time and, what is
330: important, the slow-roll approximation is invalid ($\epsilon \sim
331: 1$) just at the time of the transition from a rolling to a
332: temporary stay at the top of the potential.
333:
334: It is well known that in situations when there is a failure of the
335: slow-roll evolution the perturbations on super-horizon scales can
336: be amplified and specific features in the power spectrum can arise
337: \cite{Starobinsky:1992ts, Ivanov:1994pa, Bullock:1996at, Leach:2000yw, Leach:2001zf}
338: (see also the recent paper \cite{Jain:2007au}). In particular, in the earliest work
339: where this problem was studied \cite{Starobinsky:1992ts}, the inflation potential with a sudden
340: gradient discontinuity leading to the power spectrum of a step-like form was considered.
341: All this means that the
342: predictions of the slow-roll approximation which are based on the
343: assumption that perturbations reach an asymptotic regime outside
344: the horizon cannot be trusted.
345:
346: The curvature perturbation on comoving hypersurfaces ${\cal R}_k$, as a function of the
347: conformal time $\tau$, is a solution of the differential equation
348: (prime denotes the derivative over $\tau$)
349: \begin{equation}
350: {\cal R}_k'' + 2 \frac{z'}{z} {\cal R}_k' + k^2 {\cal R}_k = 0 ,
351: \label{Rkpp}
352: \end{equation}
353: \begin{equation}
354: \frac{z'}{z} = aH(1+\epsilon-\eta) \;\; , \;\; z \equiv \frac{a\dot\phi}{H} \; \label{zpz}
355: \end{equation}
356: ($\phi$ is the inflaton field). The standard initial condition for this equation,
357: corresponding to the Bunch-Davies \cite{Birrell:1982ix} vacuum, is
358: \begin{equation}
359: u_k(\tau) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 k}}\; e^{- i k \tau} \;\; , \;\; aH
360: \ll k \;,
361: \end{equation}
362: where $u=z {\cal R}$. The variable $u$ had been introduced in \cite{Lukash2, Mukhanov2, Sasaki:1986hm}.
363:
364:
365: The functions $\epsilon$ and $\eta$ in eq.
366: (\ref{zpz}) are the Hubble slow-roll parameters defined by the expressions \cite{Liddle:1994dx}
367: \begin{equation}
368: \epsilon = - \frac{\dot H}{H^2} = \frac{4 \pi}{m_{Pl}^2}
369: \frac {\dot \phi^2}{H^2} \;\;\; , \;\;\; %
370: \eta = - \frac {\ddot \phi } {H \dot \phi} \; .
371: \label{epsetaformula}
372: \end{equation}
373: Outside the slow-roll limit these functions are not necessarily small.
374:
375: It had been demonstrated in \cite{Leach:2000yw} that solutions of
376: the equation (\ref{Rkpp}),
377: at $k \ll aH$, i.e., outside horizon,
378: are well approximated by constant if the coefficient of the
379: friction term, $z'/z$, doesn't change sign near the horizon
380: crossing. In the opposite case, if $z'/z$ changes sign at some
381: time, the friction term becomes a negative driving term, and one
382: can expect strong effects on modes which left horizon near that
383: time. In the present paper we study the corresponding features of
384: the power spectrum, following closely the analysis of
385: \cite{Leach:2000yw}.
386:
387: According to eq. (\ref{zpz}), $z'/z$ is proportional to
388: $1+\epsilon-\eta$ and the comoving Hubble wave number $aH$. The
389: time dependences of these functions are shown in fig. \ref{DWed}b.
390: One can see that the interruption of inflation correlates with the
391: change of the sign of $1+\epsilon-\eta$.
392:
393: The time evolution of curvature perturbations for several modes is
394: shown in fig. \ref{DW-Rk-diff-k}. It is clearly seen that the
395: perturbations ${\cal R}_k$ for different modes freeze out at
396: different amplitudes. The mode which crosses horizon near the
397: moment of time when the sign of $1+\epsilon-\eta$ changes (i.e.,
398: near $t \approx 7.5 m_{Pl}$) freezes at maximum amplitude, due to
399: the exponentially growing driving term in eq. (\ref{Rkpp}) (which
400: is most effective just for this mode). It leads to the
401: characteristic peak in the power spectrum ${\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)$,
402: \begin{equation}
403: {\cal P}_{\cal R} (k) = \frac{4\pi k^3}{(2\pi)^3} | {\cal R}_k
404: |^2,
405: \end{equation}
406: shown in fig. \ref{DW-PR}.
407:
408: The calculations of ${\cal R}_k$ (fig. \ref{DW-Rk-diff-k}) are
409: carried out up to the end of inflation, and the power spectrum in
410: fig. \ref{DW-PR} also corresponds to this moment of time. We
411: estimate approximately the reheat temperature in our case as $\sim
412: (\lambda v^4)^{1/4} \sim 10^{14}$ GeV. The horizon mass at the
413: beginning of radiation era is
414: \begin{equation}
415: M_{hi} \sim 10^{17} {\rm g} \left( \frac{10^7 {\rm GeV} }{T_{\rm
416: RH} } \right) ^2 \sim 10^3 {\rm g} \;,
417: \end{equation}
418: and maximum wave number, which equals the Hubble radius at the end
419: of inflation, is
420: \begin{equation}
421: k_{\rm end} = a_{\rm eq} H_{\rm eq} \left( \frac{M_{\rm
422: eq}}{M_{hi}} \right)^{1/2} \sim 10^{23} \; {\rm Mpc}^{-1} .
423: \end{equation}
424:
425: In the fig. \ref{DW-PR-diff} we show the power spectrum calculated
426: for two stages of its evolution: at horizon exit (HE) and at the
427: end of inflation (END). In the same figure the result of the
428: calculation with an use of the slow-roll formulae is also shown.
429: The peak of HE curve at the region of large $k$ is due to a
430: failure (for ${\cal R}_k$) to reach the asymptotic limit. One can
431: see also that the slow-roll approximation is too crude to describe
432: perturbations at the end of inflation (this our conclusion agrees
433: with general statements of \cite{Leach:2000yw}).
434:
435: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
436: \begin{figure}
437: \includegraphics[width=0.98\columnwidth]{Rk-diff-k.eps} %
438: \center \caption{ \label{DW-Rk-diff-k} A time evolution of the
439: curvature perturbation ${\cal R}_k(t)$ for several different
440: values of wave number $k$ during inflation with the DW potential.
441: The parameters of the potential are the same as
442: in fig. \ref{DWbkg}. } %
443: \end{figure}
444: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
445: \begin{figure}
446: \includegraphics[width=0.98\columnwidth]{DW-PR.eps} %
447: \center \caption{\label{DW-PR} The numerically calculated power
448: spectrum ${\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)$ for the model with the potential
449: (\ref{DW}). Parameters of the potential used in the calculation
450: are the same as in fig. \ref{DWbkg}. } %
451: \end{figure}
452: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
453: \begin{figure}
454: \includegraphics[width=0.98\columnwidth]{DW-PR-diff.eps} %
455: \center \caption{\label{DW-PR-diff} The power spectrum ${\cal
456: P}_{\cal R}(k)$ for the model with potential (\ref{DW}). END:
457: ${\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)$ is calculated at the end of inflation; HE:
458: ${\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)$ is calculated at
459: the time of the horizon exit; SR: the slow-roll result.} %
460: \end{figure}
461: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
462:
463: \subsection{Coleman-Weinberg potential}
464:
465: The Coleman-Weinberg potential has the form \cite{Coleman:1973jx}:
466: \begin{equation}
467: V(\phi) = \frac{\lambda}{4}\phi^4 \left( \ln \Big | \frac{\phi}{v}
468: \Big|
469: - \frac{1}{4} \right) + %
470: \frac{\lambda}{16} v^4 .\label{CW}
471: \end{equation}
472: It looks very similar to the previous one, but the important
473: difference is its behavior near the origin. Namely, the CW
474: potential behaves as $A + B \phi^4 \ln (\phi / v)$ near the
475: origin, i.e., it is more flat near zero, in comparison with the DW
476: potential. Therefore, it has more e-folds of "new inflation"
477: \cite{Yokoyama:1998pt} and, as a consequence, the peaks of the
478: power spectrum (arising, as in the previous case, due to the
479: temporary interruption of inflation) correspond to relatively
480: smaller $k$ values. Besides, at the beginning of new inflation when the very flat region of the potential near
481: zero is crossed by $\phi$, quantum fluctuations with a particle creation can be large (e.g., see below,
482: Sec. \ref{qde}) and must be taken into account.
483:
484:
485: In fig. \ref{CW-PR} two examples of the power
486: spectrum calculations are shown for two different sets of
487: parameter values. As before, the peaks are very distinct, although
488: their amplitudes are smaller.
489:
490: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
491: \begin{figure}
492: \includegraphics[width=0.98\columnwidth]{CW2peaks.eps}
493: \center %
494: \caption{\label{CW-PR} The result for the power spectrum
495: ${\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)$ calculation for the CW potential
496: (\ref{CW}), for two sets of parameters. Left peak is for $v =
497: 1.113 M_P, \lambda = 5.5\times 10^{-13}$. For the right peak, $v
498: = 1.112 M_P, \lambda = 2.4\times 10^{-13}$. }
499: \end{figure}
500: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
501:
502: \subsection {Possibilities of PBH production}
503:
504: One can see, in particular, from fig. \ref{DW-PR}, that, in
505: principle, the production of primordial black holes (about these
506: objects, see original works \cite{Zeldovich1967, Hawking:1971ei}
507: and reviews \cite{Carr:2005zd, Khlopov:2008qy}) can be rather
508: large in single-field inflation models with potentials of
509: double-well type. The main conclusion is that it requires rather
510: large fine tuning of parameters of the potential. The
511: characteristic PBH mass is estimated by
512: \begin{equation}
513: M_{\rm BH} \approx M_h = M_{hi} \left( \frac{k_{\rm end}}{k_{\rm
514: peak}} \right) ^ 2 \; ,
515: \end{equation}
516: and in the case of the spectrum of fig. \ref{DW-PR}, $M_{\rm BH}
517: \sim 10^7$g. In the CW case, fig. \ref{CW-PR}, $M_{\rm BH} \sim
518: 100 M_{\odot}$ for the left peak and $M_{\rm BH} \sim 10^{27}$g
519: for the right peak (but the amplitudes of the spectra are too
520: small).
521:
522: Recently, it has been shown \cite{Saito:2008em} that inflation
523: with CW potential is capable to produce significant number of
524: PBHs: the parameter $v$ can be chosen (by finest tuning!) in such
525: a way that inflaton field makes several oscillations from one
526: minimum to another before it climbs on the top and "new inflation"
527: starts.
528:
529: In the present paper we do not consider possibilities of a
530: constraining of the peak amplitudes, based, for example, on the
531: effects of PBH evaporation in early Universe (see, e.g.,
532: \cite{Bugaev:2006fe}).
533:
534:
535: \section{ Running mass model \label{sec-RM} }
536:
537: \subsection { Main assumptions and approximations}
538:
539: We consider in more detail a case of the running mass inflation
540: model \cite{Stewart:1996ey, Stewart:1997wg, Covi:1998mb,
541: Covi:1998jp, Covi:1998yr, German:1999gi, Covi:2004tp} which
542: predicts a spectral index with rather strong scale dependence. The
543: potential in this case takes into account quantum corrections in
544: the context of softly broken global supersymmetry and is given by
545: the formula
546: \begin{equation}
547: V = V_0 + \frac{1}{2} m^2(\ln \phi) \phi^2.
548: \end{equation}
549: The dependence of the inflaton mass on the renormalization scale
550: $\phi$ is determined by the solution of the renormalization group
551: equation (RGE).
552:
553: {\bf 1.} The inflationary potential in supergravity theory is of
554: the order of $M_{\rm inf}^4$, where $M_{\rm inf}$ is the scale of
555: supersymmetry breaking during inflation. In turn, the mass-squared
556: of the inflaton (and any other scalar field) in supergravity has,
557: in general, the order of the square of Hubble expansion rate
558: during inflation,
559: \begin{equation}
560: | m^2 | \sim H_I^2 = \frac{V_0}{3 M_P^2}.
561: \end{equation}
562: We suppose, for simplicity (see \cite{Stewart:1996ey,
563: Stewart:1997wg, Covi:1998jp, Covi:1998yr}), that $M_{\rm inf} \sim
564: M_{\rm s}$, where $M_{\rm s}$ is the scale of supersymmetry
565: breaking in the vacuum,
566: \begin{equation} M_{\rm s} \sim \sqrt{\tilde m_s M_P} \sim
567: 10^{11} {\rm GeV} \sim 3\times 10^{-8} M_P
568: \end{equation}
569: ($\tilde m_s$ is the scale of squarks and slepton masses, $\tilde
570: m_s\sim 3$ TeV). These assumptions give the scale of the
571: inflationary potential:
572: \begin{equation}
573: V_0 \sim M_{\rm s}^4 \sim 10^{-30} M_P^4 \;\;\; , \;\;\; H_I
574: \approx 10^{-15} M_P.
575: \end{equation}
576:
577: {\bf 2.} RGE for the inflaton mass is the following (we consider a
578: model \cite{Covi:1998jp, Covi:1998yr} of hybrid inflation using
579: the softly broken SUSY with gauge group $SU(N)$ and small Yukawa
580: coupling):
581: \begin{equation}
582: m^2(t) = m_0^2 - A \tilde m_0^2 \left[ 1 -
583: \frac{1}{(1+\tilde\alpha_0 t)^2} \right] \;\;\; , \;\;\; t \equiv
584: \ln \frac{\phi}{M_P} \; , \label{m2}
585: \end{equation}
586: $m_0^2$ and $\tilde m_0^2$ are, correspondingly, the inflaton and
587: gaugino masses at $\phi=M_P$,
588: \begin{equation}
589: \tilde\alpha_0 = \frac{B \alpha_0}{2 \pi} ,
590: \end{equation}
591: $\alpha_0$ is the gauge coupling constant, $\alpha_0=g^2/4 \pi$.
592: $A$ and $B$ are positive numbers of order $1$, which are
593: different for different variants of the model, even if they are
594: based on the same supersymmetric gauge group $SU(N)$ (it depends
595: on a form of the superpotential, particle content of
596: supermultiplets, etc). We use in the present parer the variant of
597: \cite{Covi:1998yr} and, correspondingly, put everywhere below
598: $A=2$ and $B=N=2$.
599:
600: {\bf 3.} A truncated Taylor expansion of the potential around the
601: particular scale $\phi_0$ (in our case, $\phi_0$ is the inflaton
602: value at the epoch of horizon exit for the pivot scale $k_0
603: \approx 0.002h$ Mpc$^{-1}$) is
604: \begin{equation}
605: V(\phi) = V_0 + \frac{\phi^2}{2} \left[ m^2( \ln (\phi_0) ) - c
606: \frac{V_0}{M_P^2} \ln \frac{\phi}{\phi_0} + ... \right].
607: \end{equation}
608: Here, constant $c$ is defined by the equation
609: \begin{equation}
610: c \frac{V_0}{M_P^2}= \left. - \frac{dm^2}{d \ln \phi}
611: \right|_{\phi = \phi_0} . \label{ccc1}
612: \end{equation}
613:
614: In turn, a Taylor expansion of eq. (\ref{m2}) up to linear terms
615: gives ($t_0 = \ln \frac{\phi_0}{M_P}$):
616: \begin{equation}
617: m^2(t) = m^2(t_0) - 4 \tilde m_0^2 \frac{ \tilde \alpha_0}
618: {(1+\tilde \alpha_0 t_0)^3 } \ln \frac{\phi}{\phi_0} \; .
619: \label{m2m2}
620: \end{equation}
621: From eqs. (\ref{ccc1}) and (\ref{m2m2}) we obtain the expression
622: for the constant $c$,
623: \begin{equation}
624: c \frac{V_0}{M_P^2}= 4 \tilde m_0^2 \frac {\tilde \alpha_0}
625: {(1+\tilde \alpha_0 t_0)^3 } . \label{ccc2}
626: \end{equation}
627:
628:
629: If $|m_0^2| \sim \tilde m_0^2 \approx H_I^2$, then
630: \begin{equation}
631: c=\frac{4}{3} \frac{\tilde \alpha_0} {(1+\tilde \alpha_0 t_0)^3 }
632: .
633: \end{equation}
634:
635:
636: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
637: \begin{figure}
638: \includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{RM-phi.eps}
639: \includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{etaphi.eps}%
640: \center %
641: \caption{ \label{RM-phi-a-eta} {\bf a)} Evolution of the
642: inflaton field $\phi(\ln a)$ in the running mass model. {\bf b)}
643: The dependence of the parameter $\eta$ on a value of the field
644: $\phi$. For both plots,
645: $H_I=10^{-15} M_{P}$, $c = 0.062$, $s = 0.040$. } %
646: \end{figure}
647: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
648:
649:
650: It appears (see fig. \ref{RM-phi-a-eta}b) that in our example
651: $\phi_0 \sim 10^{-10} M_P$, so, $t_0 \sim \ln 10^{-10} \sim
652: (-23)$. Assuming that $\alpha_0 \sim 1/24$ (as in SUSY-GUT
653: models), one has $\tilde \alpha_0 \sim
654: \frac{2}{2\pi}\frac{1}{24}$. In such a case, $c \sim 4 \tilde
655: \alpha_0 \sim 0.06$.
656:
657: If we would keep terms of higher order in $t-t_0=\ln
658: \frac{\phi}{\phi_0}$ in the Taylor expansion of $m^2(t)$ in eq.
659: (\ref{m2m2}) we would see that the real expansion parameter is
660: $\tilde \alpha_0 \ln \frac{\phi}{\phi_0}$ rather than $\ln
661: \frac{\phi}{\phi_0}$. The smallest value of $\phi$, $\phi_{\rm
662: end}$, in our case is $\sim 10^{-16}M_P$ (see fig.
663: \ref{RM-phi-a-eta}b). Even for such value of $\phi_{\rm end}$, the
664: expansion parameter is rather small,
665: \begin{equation}
666: \tilde \alpha_0 \ln \frac{\phi_{\rm end}}{\phi_0} \sim \tilde
667: \alpha_0 \ln 10^{-6} \sim (-0.1) \; .
668: \end{equation}
669: Having this in mind, we will use the linear approximation for the
670: inflaton mass (eq. (\ref{m2m2})) in the entire region of inflaton
671: field values exploited in the present paper.
672:
673: Following the previous papers, we introduce also another
674: parameter,
675: \begin{equation}
676: s = c \ln \left( \frac{\phi_*}{\phi_0} \right),
677: \end{equation}
678: where $\phi_*$ is the inflaton value corresponding to a maximum of
679: the potential. This parameter connects the field value $\phi_0$
680: with the Hubble parameter during inflation and with the
681: normalization of the CMB power spectrum:
682: \begin{equation}
683: \phi_0 s = \frac{H_I}{2\pi {\cal P}_{\cal R}^{1/2} (k_0) } .
684: \label{phi0PR}
685: \end{equation}
686:
687: {\bf 4.} The minimum value of the inflaton field which corresponds
688: to the end of inflation can be determined from the approximate
689: equation \cite{Covi:1998yr}
690: \begin{equation}
691: \eta = M_P^2 \frac{V''}{V} \cong \frac{M_P^2}{V_0} m^2 =1 \;.
692: \end{equation}
693: Using RGE, one obtains from this formula the relation
694: \begin{equation}
695: \frac{M_P^2}{V_0} \left( m_0^2 - A \tilde m_0^2 + \frac{A \tilde
696: m_0^2}{(1+\tilde \alpha_0 t)^2 } \right) = 1.
697: \end{equation}
698: Substituting here $A=2$, $\tilde m_0^2 = |m_0^2| = V_0/3M_P^2$,
699: one has finally the approximate expression for $\phi_{\rm end}$,
700: \begin{equation}
701: \phi_{\rm end} = M_P \exp\left[{-\frac{1}{\tilde\alpha_0} \left(
702: 1 - \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} \right) }\right] \;, \label{phial0}
703: \end{equation}
704: which shows that the minimum field value is very sensitive to the
705: value of the model parameter $\tilde\alpha_0$ and, in our case,
706: does not depend on $V_0$. More exactly, the condition $\eta = 1$
707: means the end of the {\it slow-roll part} of inflation. We
708: suppose, as usual (see, e.g. \cite{Stewart:1996ey,
709: Stewart:1997wg}) that in reality inflation ends by hybrid
710: mechanism, and the critical value of inflaton field, $\phi_{\rm
711: cr}$, is determined by the value of the Yukawa coupling $\lambda$
712: (in spite of the inequality $\lambda^2 \ll \alpha$). One can check
713: \cite{Covi:1998yr} that the value of $\lambda$ can always be
714: chosen such that $\phi_{\rm cr} < \phi_{\rm end}$ and slow-roll
715: ends before the reaching of $\phi_{\rm cr}$.
716:
717: One should note that the accuracy of the approximate formula
718: (\ref{phial0}) is not very good. Luckily, in the approach based
719: on the numerical calculation of the power spectrum there is no
720: need to use it, because the value of $\phi_{\rm end}$ appears in a
721: course of the calculation (fig. \ref{RM-phi-a-eta}b).
722:
723:
724: \subsection {Power spectrum of curvature perturbations }
725:
726: An analysis of CMB anisotropy data \cite{Spergel:2006hy,
727: Dunkley:2008ie}, including other types of observation
728: \cite{Lesgourgues:2007te}, leads to the following main qualitative
729: conclusions:
730:
731: {\it i)} the power spectrum of scalar curvature perturbations is
732: red, i.e., the spectral index is negative,
733: \begin{equation}
734: n_0 = 0.97 \pm 0.01 \; ;
735: \end{equation}
736:
737: {\it ii)} observations are consistent, or, at least, are not in
738: contradiction with the small positive running of the spectral
739: index, $n_0' < 0.01$;
740:
741: {\it iii) } the contribution of tensor perturbations in the value
742: of the spectral index is small ($\lesssim 10^{-2}$) and, as a
743: result, $n \approx 1+2\eta$ ; it means that $\eta$ is negative,
744: and the potential must be concave-downward (i.e., of hill-top
745: type), while cosmological scales cross horizon during inflation
746: \cite{Kohri:2007gq}.
747:
748: One should note that, strictly speaking, the conclusion {\it iii)} is not grounded firmly enough.
749: According to the recent analysis \cite{Lesgourgues:2007aa}, the present data still admit any sign of $\eta$ and $V''$.
750:
751: These conclusions constrain the possible values of the parameters
752: $s$ and $c$. Approximately, for cosmological scale one has
753: \begin{equation}
754: n_0 - 1 \approx 2 (s - c) \;\; , \;\; n_0' \approx 2 s c \;.
755: \end{equation}
756: From the conclusion {\it iii)} it follows that $c>0$ (it is
757: consistent with eq. (\ref{phi0PR})), from the positivity of $n_0'$
758: (the conclusion {\it ii)} ) it follows that $s>0$. At last, the
759: conclusion {\it i)} leads to the inequality $s<c$.
760:
761: We choose for the power spectrum calculation the following values:
762: \begin{equation}
763: c= 0.062 \;\; , \;\; s=0.040 .
764: \end{equation}
765: These numbers correspond, at cosmological scales, to the following
766: values of slow-roll parameters:
767: \begin{equation}
768: \epsilon \approx \frac{s \phi_0^2} {M_P^2} \sim 10^{-21} \;\; ;
769: \;\; \eta \approx s - c \sim (-0.02) \;,
770: \end{equation}
771: that seems to be consistent with the present data
772: \cite{Peiris:2008be}.
773:
774: To check the validity of the slow-roll approximation, we calculate
775: the spectrum by the three ways: {\it i)} using the approximate
776: analytic slow-roll formula
777: \begin{eqnarray} \label{PRaprf}
778: \frac{{\cal P}_{\cal R} (k)}{{\cal P}_{\cal R} (k_0) } = \exp{
779: \left[ \frac{2 s}{c} \left( e^{c \Delta N(k) } -1 \right) - 2 c
780: \Delta N(k) \right] }
781: \end{eqnarray}
782: ($\Delta N(k)\equiv \ln(k/k_0)$; this expression is easily derived
783: from the simplest slow-roll prediction
784: \begin{equation}
785: {\cal P}_{\cal R} (k) = \left. \frac{H^2}{\pi \epsilon m_{Pl}^2}
786: \right| _ {aH=k} \; , \label{SRformula}
787: \end{equation}
788: which gives the power spectrum to leading order in the slow-roll
789: approximation \cite{Liddle:1993fq}); {\it ii)} using the
790: Stewart-Lyth approximation \cite{Stewart:1993bc}, which is valid
791: to first order in the slow-roll approximation,
792: \begin{eqnarray} \label{SLformula}
793: {\cal P}_{\cal R}^{1/2} (k) = \left[1-(2C+1)\epsilon + C \eta
794: \right] \frac{1}{2 \pi} \left. \frac{H^2}{| \dot\phi|} \;
795: \right|_{aH=k} \; , \\ C \approx - 0.73 \; ; \nonumber
796: \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;
797: \end{eqnarray}
798: {\it iii)} by numerical integration of the differential equation for
799: ${\cal R}_k$, eq. (\ref{Rkpp}).
800:
801:
802:
803: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
804: \begin{figure}
805: \includegraphics[width=0.94\columnwidth]{RM-PR.eps} %
806: \center %
807: \caption{ \label{PR-RM} Power spectrum ${\cal P}_{\cal R} (k)$ in
808: the running mass model, calculated numerically (solid line), by
809: the approximate analytic formula (\ref{PRaprf}) (long-dashed line)
810: and using the Stewart-Lyth extended slow-roll approximation
811: (short-dashed line). The parameters of the potential are the same
812: as used in fig. \ref{RM-phi-a-eta}. The arrow shows the value of
813: $k_{\rm end}$. }
814: \end{figure}
815: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
816:
817: The results of the calculations are presented in figs.
818: \ref{RM-phi-a-eta}-\ref{SLnum}. Fig. \ref{RM-phi-a-eta} shows the
819: evolution of the inflaton field $\phi$ with the scale factor and a
820: growth of the slow-roll parameter $\eta$ with a decrease of $\phi$
821: from $\phi_0$ to $\phi_{\rm end}$. The power spectrum is shown in
822: fig. \ref{PR-RM} for a broad interval of comoving wave numbers. It
823: is clearly seen that near the end of inflation, when
824: \begin{equation}
825: \phi \sim 10^{-16} M_P \;\; , \;\; k\sim k_{\rm end} = a_{\rm
826: end}H_{\rm end} = 3 \times 10^{16} {\rm Mpc}^{-1} \;,
827: \end{equation}
828: the slow-roll formulae are inaccurate: they strongly underestimate
829: values of ${\cal P}_{\cal R}$. To illustrate this point more
830: clearly, at the next figure we show the comparison of two curves:
831: $aH$-dependence of the spectrum calculated numerically for a
832: definite value of $k$, $k=10^{15.8}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, and $aH$-
833: dependence of the Stewart-Lyth spectrum. It is seen that the
834: numerical spectrum at the moment of crossing horizon (when $aH=k$)
835: is already almost asymptotical, and its value distinctly exceeds
836: the corresponding value predicted by Stewart-Lyth formula.
837:
838: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
839: \begin{figure}
840: \includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{NumSL.eps} %
841: \center \caption{\label{SLnum} Dependence of ${\cal P}_{\cal R}
842: (k, a)$ calculated numerically and ${\cal P}_{\cal R}$ from the
843: Stewart-Lyth formula. The comoving wave number for this figure is
844: $k=10^{15.8}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. }
845: \end{figure}
846: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
847:
848: \subsection {Quantum diffusion effects}
849: \label{qde}
850:
851: We calculated the curvature perturbations in terms of the
852: classical trajectories of a scalar field associating, in
853: particular, points in a field space with definite numbers of
854: e-folds from the end of inflation. This description becomes
855: incorrect if the quantum diffusion destroys the classical
856: evolution of the field. In this case we should use the methods of
857: stochastic inflation. The latter approach operates with the
858: coarse-grained field, which is defined to be spatial average of
859: the field $\phi$ over a physical volume with size larger than the
860: Hubble radius $H^{-1}$.
861:
862:
863: In the slow-roll approximation, the evolution of the
864: coarse-grained field $\varphi$ is governed by the first order
865: Langevin-like equation \cite{Starobinsky:1982ee, Starobinsky:1986fx, Vilenkin2,
866: Linde:1986fd}
867:
868: \begin{equation}
869: \dot \varphi + \frac{1}{3H}V'(\varphi) = \frac{H^{3/2}}{2\pi}
870: \xi(t), \label{Lang}
871: \end{equation}
872: \begin{equation}
873: \langle \xi(t) \rangle = 0 \; , \; \langle \xi(t) \xi(t')\rangle =
874: \delta(t-t').
875: \end{equation}
876: Here, $\xi(t)$ is a random noise field, and angular brackets mean
877: ensemble average. The term $\frac{1}{3H}V'(\varphi)$ describes the
878: deterministic evolution of the field $\varphi$, in the absence of
879: the noise term $\frac{H^{3/2}}{2\pi} \xi(t)$. The solution of eq.
880: (\ref{Lang}), in the absence of the noise term, is the
881: deterministic slow-roll trajectory $\varphi_{\rm sr}(t)$. Going to
882: finite time differences, the coefficient $\frac{H^{3/2}}{2\pi}$
883: can be rewritten as $\sqrt{\frac{H^3}{4 \pi^2 \Delta t} }$, and
884: the evolution of $\varphi$ on timescales $\Delta t \ge H^{-1}$ can
885: be described by a finite-difference form of the eq. (\ref{Lang}),
886: \begin{equation}
887: \varphi(t+\Delta t) - \varphi(t) = - \frac{1}{3H}V'(\varphi)
888: \Delta t + \frac{1}{2 \pi} \sqrt{H^3 \Delta t} \; \xi(t).
889: \label{LangFD}
890: \end{equation}
891: The condition for the deterministic evolution is (see, e.g.,
892: \cite{Winitzki:2006rn})
893: \begin{equation}
894: \frac{1}{3H} | V'(\varphi) | \Delta t \gg \frac{1}{2 \pi}
895: \sqrt{H^3 \Delta t} \;\; , \;\; \Delta t = H^{-1}.
896: \end{equation}
897: Using the slow-roll connection between $V$ and $H$, one obtains
898: \begin{equation}
899: | V'(\varphi) | \gg \frac{3}{2 \pi} H^3 = \frac{1}{2 \pi \sqrt{3}}
900: V^{3/2}(\varphi). \label{compareV}
901: \end{equation}
902:
903: In the approach of \cite{Martin:2005ir} the coarse-grained field
904: is considered as a perturbation of the classical solution
905: $\varphi_{\rm cl}$ (which is the solution of the Langevin equation
906: without the noise),
907: \begin{equation}
908: \label{phi012} \varphi(t) = \varphi_{\rm cl}(t) + \delta
909: \varphi_{1}(t) + \delta \varphi_{2}(t) + ... \; .
910: \end{equation}
911: Here, the term $\delta \varphi_{i}(t)$ depends on the noise at the
912: power $i$. It is assumed that the Hubble parameter in the
913: Langevin equation depends only on the coarse-grained field
914: $\varphi$,
915: \begin{equation}
916: H^2(\varphi) = \frac{1}{3 M_P^2} V(\varphi).
917: \end{equation}
918: Correspondingly, the Hubble parameter can be expanded
919: perturbatively,
920: \begin{equation}
921: H(\varphi) = H_{\rm cl} + H_{\rm cl}'(\delta \varphi_{1} + \delta
922: \varphi_{2}) + \frac{H_{\rm cl}''}{2} \delta \varphi_{1}^2 + ...
923: \; ,
924: \end{equation}
925: \begin{equation}
926: H_{\rm cl} = H(\varphi_{\rm cl}) = \sqrt {\frac{V(\varphi_{\rm
927: cl})}{3 M_P^2}
928: }.
929: \end{equation}
930:
931: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
932: \begin{figure} [!t]
933: \includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{V32f1.eps}
934: \includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{V32f2.eps} %
935: \center \caption{ \label{compV-fig} {\bf a)} Comparison of $V'$
936: and $V^{3/2}$ for the running mass model (see eq.
937: (\ref{compareV})). {\bf b)} The same figure in different scale:
938: variable $x$ is connected to the field value by the relation
939: $\varphi= (1- 10^{-x})\varphi_*$. } %
940: \end{figure}
941:
942: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
943: \begin{figure} [!t]
944: \includegraphics[width=0.98\columnwidth]{dff.eps} %
945: \center \caption{ \label{dff-fig} The result for the calculation
946: of $\delta \varphi / \varphi$ for different values of
947: $\varphi_{\rm in} = \varphi_*(1-10^{-x})$. From bottom to top, $x$
948: equals 3, 4, 5. Here, $\delta \varphi \equiv \sqrt {\langle
949: \delta\varphi_1^2 \rangle} +\langle \delta\varphi_2 \rangle$.
950: } %
951: \end{figure}
952: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
953:
954: This approach permits to calculate the mean value of the total
955: number of e-folds, $\langle N \rangle$, and to compare it with
956: the corresponding "classical" number,
957: \begin{eqnarray} \nonumber
958: N_T^{\rm cl} = - \frac{1}{2 M_P^2} \int\limits_{\varphi_{\rm
959: in}}^{\varphi_{\rm end}} d \varphi_{\rm cl} \frac{H_{\rm
960: cl}}{H_{\rm cl}'} =
961: \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;
962: \\
963: = \frac{1}{M_P^2} \int\limits_{\varphi_{\rm
964: end}}^{\varphi_{\rm in}} d \varphi_{\rm cl} \left( \frac{V}{V'}
965: \right) ;
966: \end{eqnarray}
967: \begin{eqnarray} \nonumber
968: \delta N_T = \langle N_T \rangle - N_T^{\rm cl} =
969: \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;
970: \\
971: = - \frac{1}{2
972: M_P^2} \int\limits_{\varphi_{\rm in}}^{\varphi_{\rm end}} \left[
973: \langle \delta \varphi_2 \rangle + \frac{H_{\rm cl}''}{2 H_{\rm
974: cl}'} \langle \delta \varphi_1^2 \rangle \right] d \varphi_{\rm
975: cl}. \label{NT}
976: \end{eqnarray}
977: Besides, one can calculate the mean value of the Gaussian
978: probability distribution function for the coarse-grained field
979: and to see how it behaves as a function of the current field
980: value.
981:
982: The interval of inflaton field values for which the inequality
983: (\ref{compareV}) holds and, therefore, the deterministic evolution
984: dominates, is shown in fig. \ref{compV-fig}a,b. The variable $x$
985: in fig. \ref{compV-fig}b is defined by the relation
986: \begin{equation}
987: \frac{\varphi_{\rm in}}{\varphi_{*}} = 1 - 10^{-x}
988: \label{x-define}
989: \end{equation}
990: ($\varphi_{*}$ is, as before, the point of a maximum of the
991: potential $V(\varphi)$). It is seen from the figure that the
992: constraints on the inflaton field following from the condition
993: (\ref{compareV}) are not too severe,
994: \begin{equation}
995: 3 \times 10^{-19} M_P \;\; \lesssim \;\; \varphi \;\; \lesssim
996: \;\; \varphi_* - 10^{-7} \varphi_* \;. \label{phiinlimit}
997: \end{equation}
998:
999: An accuracy of the perturbative expansion (\ref{phi012}) for the
1000: monomial potential of stochastic inflation models was studied in
1001: \cite{Martin:2005hb}. Here we study this accuracy for the running
1002: mass potential, using the parameters $V_0$, $s$, $c$,
1003: $\varphi_{\rm end}$ introduced above. The results of the
1004: calculation of $\langle \delta\varphi_1^2 \rangle$ and $\langle
1005: \delta\varphi_2 \rangle$ are shown in fig. \ref{dff-fig}. As one
1006: can see, the perturbative expansion is good if the starting value
1007: of the inflaton field, $\varphi_{\rm in}$, is chosen to be not too
1008: close to the value of $\varphi$ at the maximum of the potential.
1009: More exactly, the parameter $x$, defined in eq. (\ref{x-define}),
1010: must be smaller than $4 \div 4.5$. The starting value
1011: $\varphi_{\rm in}$ corresponds to a beginning of the evolution,
1012: i.e., $\delta\varphi_1(t_{\rm in}) = \delta\varphi_2(t_{\rm in}) =
1013: 0$.
1014:
1015: If the evolution is deterministic, the correction to a classical
1016: e-fold number $N_T^{\rm cl}$ , given by eq. (\ref{NT}), is small.
1017: To estimate analytically the upper limit for this correction, we
1018: used the analytic expressions for $\langle \delta\varphi_1^2
1019: \rangle$ and $\langle \delta\varphi_2 \rangle$ derived in
1020: \cite{Martin:2005ir}, keeping in them leading terms only.
1021: According to these expressions, the following inequalities hold:
1022: \begin{eqnarray} \nonumber
1023: \langle \delta\varphi_2 \rangle \;\; < \;\; %
1024: \left( \frac{V_0}{M_P} \right)^4 \left( \frac{M_P}{\varphi_{\rm
1025: in}} \right)^2 \frac{1}{\ln^2 \frac {\varphi_{\rm
1026: in}}{\varphi_{*}} } \frac{\varphi}{M_P} \; \lesssim \\ \lesssim
1027: 10^{-10+2x} \varphi \;\; ,
1028: \end{eqnarray}
1029: \begin{equation}
1030: \langle \delta\varphi_1^2 \rangle \;\; < \;\; %
1031: \left( \frac{V_0}{M_P} \right)^4 %
1032: \frac{1}{\ln^2 \frac {\varphi_{\rm in}}{\varphi_{*}} } \; \sim \;
1033: 10^{-30+2x} M_P^2 \; .
1034: \end{equation}
1035: Using these upper limits, one can estimate the corresponding upper
1036: limits of two integrals in the expression for $\delta N_T$
1037: (\ref{NT}). The result is the following:
1038: \begin{eqnarray}
1039: \frac{1}{M_P^2} \int \limits_{\varphi_{\rm end}}^{\varphi_{\rm
1040: in}} \langle \delta\varphi_2 \rangle d \varphi_{\rm cl} \;\; <
1041: \;\; 10^{-30+2x} \; ;
1042: \\
1043: \frac{1}{M_P^2} \int \limits_{\varphi_{\rm end}}^{\varphi_{\rm
1044: in}} \frac{ \langle \delta\varphi_1^2 \rangle H_{\rm cl}''} {
1045: H_{\rm cl}' } d \varphi_{\rm cl} \;\; < \;\; 10^{-30+3x} \; .
1046: \label{dNx}
1047: \end{eqnarray}
1048:
1049: It is clear from the inequalities (\ref{dNx}) that the quantum
1050: correction to e-fold number, $\delta N_T$, is quantitatively small
1051: even if the value of $x$ is as large as $10$. But only if $x <
1052: 4\div 4.5$ , and the perturbative expansion, eq. (\ref{phi012}),
1053: is valid, one really can be sure that
1054: \begin{equation}
1055: \delta N_T \ll N_T^{\rm cl} \; ,
1056: \end{equation}
1057: and the evolution is deterministic.
1058:
1059: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1060: \begin{figure}[!t]
1061: \includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{RMvol1.eps}
1062: \includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{RMvol2.eps} %
1063: \center %
1064: \caption{\label{fig-vol} Calculation of stochastic effects for
1065: various values of initial
1066: field $\varphi_{\rm in}$. %
1067: {\bf a)} Thin dashed curve: $\varphi_{\rm in} = (1-1.5 \times
1068: 10^{-5})\varphi_*$, no volume effects included; thick dashed
1069: curve: $\varphi_{\rm in}= (1-1.5 \times 10^{-5})\varphi_*$, volume
1070: effects included; solid thick curve: $\varphi_{\rm in}=(1- 3
1071: \times 10^{-5}) \varphi_*$ , volume effects included.
1072: %
1073: {\bf b)} Thick long-dashed and thick short-dashed curves
1074: correspond to the cases with and without inclusion of volume
1075: effects, respectively, for $\varphi_{\rm in} = (1-3 \times
1076: 10^{-5}) \varphi_*$.
1077: } %
1078: \end{figure}
1079: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1080:
1081: However, this analysis is still not complete: one must check also
1082: the position of the mean value of the probability distribution
1083: function for the coarse-grained field \cite{Martin:2005ir}. The
1084: calculation, with taking into account the volume effects, leads to
1085: the results shown in fig. \ref{fig-vol}a,b. It is seen from the
1086: figure that in this case also, as in the calculation of the e-fold
1087: number correction, the correct choice of the initial condition
1088: plays a decisive role: there are no effects of a "walk" of the
1089: mean value around the maximum of the potential (such effects were
1090: noticed in \cite{Martin:2005ir}) if evolution starts from the
1091: point which is far enough from the maximum ($x \lesssim 4.5$). Of
1092: course, the realization of the initial condition of this kind is,
1093: in itself, a problem. Supposedly, it could be provided by the
1094: previous history of eternal inflation \cite{Stewart:1996ey,
1095: Stewart:1997wg}.
1096:
1097: \section{Conclusions \label{sec-Concl}}
1098:
1099: {\bf 1.} It is shown, by numerical methods, that in the
1100: single-field inflationary model with a simple double-well
1101: potential the parameter values of this potential can be chosen in
1102: such a way that the power spectrum of curvature perturbations
1103: ${\cal P}_{\cal R} (k)$ has a huge peak (with amplitude $\sim
1104: 0.1$) at large $k$ (and the right normalization and monotonic
1105: behavior at cosmological scales). The peak arises due to temporary
1106: interruption of the slow-roll near points of the minimum of the
1107: potential, $\pm v$. The corresponding mass of PBHs produced in
1108: early universe in a case of the realization of such power spectrum
1109: is about $10^7$g.
1110:
1111: The analogous behavior of the power spectrum was obtained by
1112: authors of \cite{Saito:2008em} in a model with CW potential. There
1113: are some important differences in the results of
1114: \cite{Saito:2008em} and ours, in the peak amplitude and PBH mass,
1115: connected, in particular, with a large flatness near the origin in
1116: a case of the CW potential.
1117:
1118: {\bf 2.} It is shown that the inflation model with running mass
1119: potential predicts a rather large amplitude of the power spectrum
1120: of curvature perturbations ($\sim 0.1$) at $k$-values $\sim
1121: 10^{16}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. For such a prediction, a very small positive
1122: spectral index running at cosmological scales is necessary, $n'~
1123: \sim 0.005$, as well as a small negative value for the slow-roll
1124: parameter $\eta$ ($\approx -0.02$). Both this numbers do not
1125: contradict with data. It is shown also that for an obtaining the
1126: correct quantitative results for the power spectrum at largest
1127: $k$-values an use of numerical methods is required because, in
1128: general, slow-roll formulas are not accurate enough at the end of
1129: inflation, where $\eta \approx 1$.
1130:
1131: {\bf 3.} Quantum diffusion effects in a model with the running
1132: mass potential are studied in details. It is shown that
1133: inflationary evolution of the universe in a model with a scalar
1134: field and the running mass potential can be described by the
1135: classic deterministic equations, and for a possibility of such a
1136: description the correct choice of the initial conditions is
1137: crucial. Concretely, an initial value of the inflaton field (at
1138: the beginning of the evolution) should not be too close to a point
1139: of the maximum of the potential. If this condition is satisfied,
1140: the quantum corrections to a total e-fold number and to a position
1141: of the mean value of the probability distribution function are
1142: small.
1143:
1144: \begin{acknowledgments}
1145: Authors are grateful to Prof. A.A. Starobinsky for useful remarks.
1146:
1147: The work was supported by Russian Foundation for Basic Research
1148: (grant 06-02-16135).
1149: \end{acknowledgments}
1150:
1151: %\bibliography{ms}
1152:
1153: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1154:
1155: \begin{thebibliography}{41}
1156: \expandafter\ifx\csname
1157: natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
1158: \expandafter\ifx\csname bibnamefont\endcsname\relax
1159: \def\bibnamefont#1{#1}\fi
1160: \expandafter\ifx\csname bibfnamefont\endcsname\relax
1161: \def\bibfnamefont#1{#1}\fi
1162: \expandafter\ifx\csname citenamefont\endcsname\relax
1163: \def\citenamefont#1{#1}\fi
1164: \expandafter\ifx\csname url\endcsname\relax
1165: \def\url#1{\texttt{#1}}\fi
1166: \expandafter\ifx\csname
1167: urlprefix\endcsname\relax\def\urlprefix{URL }\fi
1168: \providecommand{\bibinfo}[2]{#2}
1169: \providecommand{\eprint}[2][]{\url{#2}}
1170:
1171: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Kohri et~al.}(2007)\citenamefont{Kohri, Lin, and
1172: Lyth}}]{Kohri:2007gq}
1173: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{K.}~\bibnamefont{Kohri}},
1174: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.-M.} \bibnamefont{Lin}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1175: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~H.} \bibnamefont{Lyth}},
1176: \bibinfo{journal}{JCAP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{0712}}, \bibinfo{pages}{004}
1177: (\bibinfo{year}{2007}), \eprint{arXiv:0707.3826}.
1178:
1179: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Kohri et~al.}(2008)\citenamefont{Kohri, Lyth, and
1180: Melchiorri}}]{Kohri:2007qn}
1181: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{K.}~\bibnamefont{Kohri}},
1182: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~H.} \bibnamefont{Lyth}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1183: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Melchiorri}},
1184: \bibinfo{journal}{JCAP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{0804}}, \bibinfo{pages}{038}
1185: (\bibinfo{year}{2008}), \eprint{arXiv:0711.5006}.
1186:
1187: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Saito et~al.}(2008)\citenamefont{Saito, Yokoyama, and
1188: Nagata}}]{Saito:2008em}
1189: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{R.}~\bibnamefont{Saito}},
1190: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Yokoyama}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1191: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{R.}~\bibnamefont{Nagata}}
1192: (\bibinfo{year}{2008}), \eprint{arXiv:0804.3470}.
1193:
1194: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Peiris and Easther}(2008)}]{Peiris:2008be}
1195: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{H.~V.} \bibnamefont{Peiris}} \bibnamefont{and}
1196: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{R.}~\bibnamefont{Easther}}
1197: (\bibinfo{year}{2008}), \eprint{arXiv:0805.2154}.
1198:
1199: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Boubekeur and Lyth}(2005)}]{Boubekeur:2005zm}
1200: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Boubekeur}} \bibnamefont{and}
1201: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~H.} \bibnamefont{Lyth}},
1202: \bibinfo{journal}{JCAP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{0507}}, \bibinfo{pages}{010}
1203: (\bibinfo{year}{2005}), \eprint{hep-ph/0502047}.
1204:
1205: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Yokoyama}(1998)}]{Yokoyama:1998pt}
1206: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Yokoyama}},
1207: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D58}},
1208: \bibinfo{pages}{083510} (\bibinfo{year}{1998}), \eprint{astro-ph/9802357}.
1209:
1210: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Leach et~al.}(2000)\citenamefont{Leach, Grivell, and
1211: Liddle}}]{Leach:2000ea}
1212: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.~M.} \bibnamefont{Leach}},
1213: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~J.} \bibnamefont{Grivell}},
1214: \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~R.}
1215: \bibnamefont{Liddle}}, \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.}
1216: \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D62}}, \bibinfo{pages}{043516}
1217: (\bibinfo{year}{2000}), \eprint{astro-ph/0004296}.
1218:
1219:
1220: %\bibitem[{\citenamefont{Gong and Stewart}(2001)}]{Gong:2001he}
1221: %\bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.-O.} \bibnamefont{Gong}} \bibnamefont{and}
1222: % \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{E.~D.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}},
1223: % \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B510}},
1224: % \bibinfo{pages}{1} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}), \eprint{astro-ph/0101225}.
1225:
1226: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Starobinsky}(1992)}]{Starobinsky:1992ts}
1227: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~A.} \bibnamefont{Starobinsky}},
1228: \bibinfo{journal}{JETP Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{55}},
1229: \bibinfo{pages}{489} (\bibinfo{year}{1992}).
1230:
1231: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Ivanov et~al.}(1994)\citenamefont{Ivanov, Naselsky, and
1232: Novikov}}]{Ivanov:1994pa}
1233: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.}~\bibnamefont{Ivanov}},
1234: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.}~\bibnamefont{Naselsky}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1235: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.}~\bibnamefont{Novikov}},
1236: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D50}},
1237: \bibinfo{pages}{7173} (\bibinfo{year}{1994}).
1238:
1239: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Bullock and Primack}(1997)}]{Bullock:1996at}
1240: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.~S.} \bibnamefont{Bullock}} \bibnamefont{and}
1241: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.~R.} \bibnamefont{Primack}},
1242: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D55}},
1243: \bibinfo{pages}{7423} (\bibinfo{year}{1997}), \eprint{astro-ph/9611106}.
1244:
1245: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Leach and Liddle}(2001)}]{Leach:2000yw}
1246: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.~M.} \bibnamefont{Leach}} \bibnamefont{and}
1247: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~R.} \bibnamefont{Liddle}},
1248: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D63}},
1249: \bibinfo{pages}{043508} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}), \eprint{astro-ph/0010082}.
1250:
1251: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Leach et~al.}(2001)\citenamefont{Leach, Sasaki, Wands,
1252: and Liddle}}]{Leach:2001zf}
1253: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.~M.} \bibnamefont{Leach}},
1254: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Sasaki}},
1255: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.}~\bibnamefont{Wands}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1256: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~R.} \bibnamefont{Liddle}},
1257: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D64}},
1258: \bibinfo{pages}{023512} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}), \eprint{astro-ph/0101406}.
1259:
1260: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Jain et~al.}(2007)\citenamefont{Jain, Chingangbam, and
1261: Sriramkumar}}]{Jain:2007au}
1262: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{R.~K.} \bibnamefont{Jain}},
1263: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.}~\bibnamefont{Chingangbam}},
1264: \bibnamefont{and}
1265: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Sriramkumar}},
1266: \bibinfo{journal}{JCAP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{0710}}, \bibinfo{pages}{003}
1267: (\bibinfo{year}{2007}), \eprint{astro-ph/0703762}.
1268:
1269: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Birrell and Davies}(1982)}]{Birrell:1982ix}
1270: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{N.~D.} \bibnamefont{Birrell}} \bibnamefont{and}
1271: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.~C.~W.} \bibnamefont{Davies}},
1272: \bibinfo{note}{{\it Quantum Fields In Curved Space}, Cambridge, Uk: Univ. Pr. (1982) 340p}.
1273:
1274: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Lukash}(1980{\natexlab{a}})}]{Lukash2}
1275: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~N.} \bibnamefont{Lukash}},
1276: \bibinfo{journal}{JETP Lett} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{31}},
1277: \bibinfo{pages}{596} (\bibinfo{year}{1980}{\natexlab{a}});
1278: %\bibitem[{\citenamefont{Lukash}(1980{\natexlab{b}})}]{Lukash:1980iv}
1279: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~N.} \bibnamefont{Lukash}},
1280: \bibinfo{journal}{Sov. Phys. JETP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{52}},
1281: \bibinfo{pages}{807} (\bibinfo{year}{1980}{\natexlab{b}}).
1282:
1283: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Mukhanov}(1985)}]{Mukhanov2}%{Mukhanov:1985rz}
1284: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~F.} \bibnamefont{Mukhanov}},
1285: \bibinfo{journal}{JETP Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{41}},
1286: \bibinfo{pages}{493} (\bibinfo{year}{1985});
1287: %\bibitem[{\citenamefont{Mukhanov}(1988)}]{Mukhanov:1988jd}
1288: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~F.} \bibnamefont{Mukhanov}},
1289: \bibinfo{journal}{Sov. Phys. JETP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{67}},
1290: \bibinfo{pages}{1297} (\bibinfo{year}{1988}).
1291:
1292: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Sasaki}(1986)}]{Sasaki:1986hm}
1293: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Sasaki}},
1294: \bibinfo{journal}{Prog. Theor. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{76}},
1295: \bibinfo{pages}{1036} (\bibinfo{year}{1986}).
1296:
1297: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Liddle et~al.}(1994)\citenamefont{Liddle, Parsons, and
1298: Barrow}}]{Liddle:1994dx}
1299: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~R.} \bibnamefont{Liddle}},
1300: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.}~\bibnamefont{Parsons}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1301: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.~D.} \bibnamefont{Barrow}},
1302: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D50}},
1303: \bibinfo{pages}{7222} (\bibinfo{year}{1994}), \eprint{astro-ph/9408015}.
1304:
1305: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Coleman and Weinberg}(1973)}]{Coleman:1973jx}
1306: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.~R.} \bibnamefont{Coleman}} \bibnamefont{and}
1307: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{E.}~\bibnamefont{Weinberg}},
1308: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D7}},
1309: \bibinfo{pages}{1888} (\bibinfo{year}{1973}).
1310:
1311: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Zeldovich and Novikov}(1967)}]{Zeldovich1967}
1312: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{Y.~B.} \bibnamefont{Zeldovich}}
1313: \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{I.~D.}
1314: \bibnamefont{Novikov}}, \bibinfo{journal}{Sov. Astron.}
1315: \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{10}}, \bibinfo{pages}{602} (\bibinfo{year}{1967}).
1316:
1317: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Hawking}(1971)}]{Hawking:1971ei}
1318: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.}~\bibnamefont{Hawking}},
1319: \bibinfo{journal}{Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.}
1320: \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{152}}, \bibinfo{pages}{75} (\bibinfo{year}{1971}).
1321:
1322: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Carr}(2005)}]{Carr:2005zd}
1323: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{B.~J.} \bibnamefont{Carr}}
1324: (\bibinfo{year}{2005}), \eprint{astro-ph/0511743}.
1325:
1326: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Khlopov}(2008)}]{Khlopov:2008qy}
1327: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.~Y.} \bibnamefont{Khlopov}}
1328: (\bibinfo{year}{2008}), \eprint{arXiv:0801.0116}.
1329:
1330: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Bugaev and Klimai}(2006)}]{Bugaev:2006fe}
1331: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{E.}~\bibnamefont{Bugaev}} \bibnamefont{and}
1332: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.}~\bibnamefont{Klimai}}
1333: (\bibinfo{year}{2006}), \eprint{astro-ph/0612659}.
1334:
1335: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Stewart}(1997{\natexlab{a}})}]{Stewart:1996ey}
1336: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{E.~D.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}},
1337: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B391}},
1338: \bibinfo{pages}{34} (\bibinfo{year}{1997}{\natexlab{a}}),
1339: \eprint{hep-ph/9606241}.
1340:
1341: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Stewart}(1997{\natexlab{b}})}]{Stewart:1997wg}
1342: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{E.~D.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}},
1343: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D56}},
1344: \bibinfo{pages}{2019} (\bibinfo{year}{1997}{\natexlab{b}}),
1345: \eprint{hep-ph/9703232}.
1346:
1347: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Covi and Lyth}(1999)}]{Covi:1998mb}
1348: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Covi}} \bibnamefont{and}
1349: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~H.} \bibnamefont{Lyth}},
1350: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D59}},
1351: \bibinfo{pages}{063515} (\bibinfo{year}{1999}), \eprint{hep-ph/9809562}.
1352:
1353: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Covi et~al.}(1999)\citenamefont{Covi, Lyth, and
1354: Roszkowski}}]{Covi:1998jp}
1355: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Covi}},
1356: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~H.} \bibnamefont{Lyth}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1357: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Roszkowski}},
1358: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D60}},
1359: \bibinfo{pages}{023509} (\bibinfo{year}{1999}), \eprint{hep-ph/9809310}.
1360:
1361: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Covi}(1999)}]{Covi:1998yr}
1362: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Covi}}, \bibinfo{journal}{Phys.
1363: Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D60}}, \bibinfo{pages}{023513}
1364: (\bibinfo{year}{1999}), \eprint{hep-ph/9812232}.
1365:
1366: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{German et~al.}(1999)\citenamefont{German, Ross, and
1367: Sarkar}}]{German:1999gi}
1368: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{G.}~\bibnamefont{German}},
1369: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{G.~G.} \bibnamefont{Ross}}, \bibnamefont{and}
1370: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.}~\bibnamefont{Sarkar}},
1371: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B469}},
1372: \bibinfo{pages}{46} (\bibinfo{year}{1999}), \eprint{hep-ph/9908380}.
1373:
1374: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Covi et~al.}(2004)\citenamefont{Covi, Lyth, Melchiorri,
1375: and Odman}}]{Covi:2004tp}
1376: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Covi}},
1377: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~H.} \bibnamefont{Lyth}},
1378: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Melchiorri}},
1379: \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~J.} \bibnamefont{Odman}},
1380: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D70}},
1381: \bibinfo{pages}{123521} (\bibinfo{year}{2004}), \eprint{astro-ph/0408129}.
1382:
1383: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Spergel et~al.}(2007)}]{Spergel:2006hy}
1384: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~N.} \bibnamefont{Spergel}}
1385: \bibnamefont{et~al.} (\bibinfo{collaboration}{WMAP}),
1386: \bibinfo{journal}{Astrophys. J. Suppl.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{170}},
1387: \bibinfo{pages}{377} (\bibinfo{year}{2007}), \eprint{astro-ph/0603449}.
1388:
1389: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Dunkley et~al.}(2008)}]{Dunkley:2008ie}
1390: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Dunkley}} \bibnamefont{et~al.}
1391: (\bibinfo{collaboration}{WMAP}) (\bibinfo{year}{2008}),
1392: \eprint{arXiv:0803.0586}.
1393:
1394: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Lesgourgues et~al.}(2007)\citenamefont{Lesgourgues,
1395: Viel, Haehnelt, and Massey}}]{Lesgourgues:2007te}
1396: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Lesgourgues}},
1397: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Viel}},
1398: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.~G.} \bibnamefont{Haehnelt}},
1399: \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{R.}~\bibnamefont{Massey}},
1400: \bibinfo{journal}{JCAP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{0711}}, \bibinfo{pages}{008}
1401: (\bibinfo{year}{2007}), \eprint{arXiv:0705.0533}.
1402:
1403: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Lesgourgues et~al.}(2008)\citenamefont{Lesgourgues,
1404: Starobinsky, and Valkenburg}}]{Lesgourgues:2007aa}
1405: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Lesgourgues}},
1406: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~A.} \bibnamefont{Starobinsky}},
1407: \bibnamefont{and}
1408: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{W.}~\bibnamefont{Valkenburg}},
1409: \bibinfo{journal}{JCAP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{0801}}, \bibinfo{pages}{010}
1410: (\bibinfo{year}{2008}), \eprint{0710.1630}.
1411:
1412: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Liddle and Lyth}(1993)}]{Liddle:1993fq}
1413: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~R.} \bibnamefont{Liddle}} \bibnamefont{and}
1414: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~H.} \bibnamefont{Lyth}},
1415: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rept.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{231}},
1416: \bibinfo{pages}{1} (\bibinfo{year}{1993}), \eprint{astro-ph/9303019}.
1417:
1418:
1419: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Stewart and Lyth}(1993)}]{Stewart:1993bc}
1420: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{E.~D.} \bibnamefont{Stewart}} \bibnamefont{and}
1421: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~H.} \bibnamefont{Lyth}},
1422: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B302}},
1423: \bibinfo{pages}{171} (\bibinfo{year}{1993}), \eprint{gr-qc/9302019}.
1424:
1425: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Starobinsky}(1982)}]{Starobinsky:1982ee}
1426: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~A.} \bibnamefont{Starobinsky}},
1427: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B117}},
1428: \bibinfo{pages}{175} (\bibinfo{year}{1982}).
1429:
1430: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Starobinsky}(1986)}]{Starobinsky:1986fx}
1431: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~A.} \bibnamefont{Starobinsky}},
1432: \bibinfo{note}{in: {\it Field Theory, Quantum Gravity and Strings}, eds. H.J. de Vega, N. Sanchez,
1433: Lect. Notes in Physics (Springer-Verlag), vol. 246, pp. 107-126}
1434: (\bibinfo{year}{1986}).
1435:
1436: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Vilenkin}(1983{\natexlab{a}})}]{Vilenkin2}%{Vilenkin:1983xq}
1437: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Vilenkin}},
1438: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D27}},
1439: \bibinfo{pages}{2848} (\bibinfo{year}{1983}{\natexlab{a}});
1440: %\bibitem[{\citenamefont{Vilenkin}(1983{\natexlab{b}})}]{Vilenkin:1983xp}
1441: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Vilenkin}},
1442: \bibinfo{journal}{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B226}},
1443: \bibinfo{pages}{527} (\bibinfo{year}{1983}{\natexlab{b}}).
1444:
1445: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Linde}(1986)}]{Linde:1986fd}
1446: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~D.} \bibnamefont{Linde}},
1447: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B175}},
1448: \bibinfo{pages}{395} (\bibinfo{year}{1986}).
1449:
1450: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Winitzki}(2008)}]{Winitzki:2006rn}
1451: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.}~\bibnamefont{Winitzki}},
1452: \bibinfo{journal}{Lect. Notes Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{738}},
1453: \bibinfo{pages}{157} (\bibinfo{year}{2008}), \eprint{gr-qc/0612164}.
1454:
1455: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Martin and Musso}(2006{\natexlab{a}})}]{Martin:2005ir}
1456: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Martin}} \bibnamefont{and}
1457: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Musso}},
1458: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D73}},
1459: \bibinfo{pages}{043516} (\bibinfo{year}{2006}{\natexlab{a}}),
1460: \eprint{hep-th/0511214}.
1461:
1462: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Martin and Musso}(2006{\natexlab{b}})}]{Martin:2005hb}
1463: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Martin}} \bibnamefont{and}
1464: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Musso}},
1465: \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{D73}},
1466: \bibinfo{pages}{043517} (\bibinfo{year}{2006}{\natexlab{b}}),
1467: \eprint{hep-th/0511292}.
1468:
1469: \end{thebibliography}
1470:
1471:
1472: \end{document}
1473: