4.6 Article

Constraining non-minimally coupled ?-exponential inflation with CMB data

Journal

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1475-7516/2022/06/001

Keywords

cosmological parameters from CMBR; inflation; cosmological parameters from LSS; modified gravity

Funding

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES)
  2. Programa de Capacitacao Institucional (PCI) do Observatorio Nacional/MCTI [301869/2021-9]
  3. CNPq [307620/2019-0]
  4. Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN), sezione di Napoli, iniziativa specifica QGSKY
  5. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico CNPq [310790/2014-0, 400471/2014-0]
  6. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro FAPERJ [233906]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper updates previous constraints on the minimal coupled fl-exponential model and extends the results to derive the equations for the non-minimal coupled scenario. The predictions of both models are compared with observational data and the standard ACDM cosmology, and it is found that the data moderately prefer the non-minimally coupled fl-exponential inflationary model.
The fl-exponential inflation is driven by a class of primordial potentials, derived in the framework of braneworld scenarios, that generalizes the well-known power law inflation. In this paper we update previous constraints on the minimal coupled fl-exponential model [1] and extend the results also deriving the equations for the non-minimal coupled scenario. The predictions of both models are tested in light of the latest temperature and polarization maps of the Cosmic Microwave Background and clustering data. We also compare the predictions of these models with the standard ACDM cosmology using the Deviance Information Criterion (DIC), and find that the observational data show a moderate preference for the non-minimally coupled fl-exponential inflationary model.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available