Printer Friendly

More on the Non-Gaussianity of Perturbations in a Nonminimal Inflationary Model.

1. Introduction

The idea of cosmological inflation is capable of addressing some problems of the standard big bang theory, such as the horizon, flatness, and monopole problems. Also, it can provide a reliable mechanism for generation of density perturbations responsible for structure formation and therefore temperature anisotropies in Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) spectrum [1-8]. There are a wide variety of cosmological inflation models where viability of their predictions in comparison with observations makes them acceptable or unacceptable (see, for instance, [9, 10] for this purpose). The simplest inflationary model is a single scalar field scenario in which inflation is driven by a scalar field called the inflaton that predicts adiabatic, Gaussian, and scale-invariant fluctuations [11]. But recently observational data have revealed some degrees of scale-dependence in the primordial density perturbations. Also, Planck team have obtained some constraints on the primordial non-Gaussianity [12-14]. Therefore, it seems that extended models of inflation which can explain or address this scale-dependence and non-Gaussianity of perturbations are more desirable. There are a lot of studies in this respect, some of which can be seen in [15-20] with references therein. Among various inflationary models, the nonminimal models have attracted much attention. Nonminimal coupling of the inflaton field and gravitational sector is inevitable from the renormalizability of the corresponding field theory (see, for instance, [21]). Cosmological inflation driven by a scalar field nonminimally coupled to gravity is studied, for instance, in [22-29]. There were some issues on the unitarity violation with nonminimal coupling (see, for instance, [30-32]) which have forced researchers to consider possible coupling of the derivatives of the scalar field with geometry [33]. In fact, it has been shown that a model with nonminimal coupling between the kinetic terms of the inflaton (derivatives of the scalar field) and the Einstein tensor preserves the unitary bound during inflation [34]. Also, the presence of nonminimal derivative coupling is a powerful tool to increase the friction of an inflaton rolling down its own potential [34]. Some authors have considered the model with this coupling term and have studied the early time accelerating expansion of the universe as well as the late time dynamics [35-37]. In this paper we extend the nonminimal inflation models to the case that a canonical inflaton field is coupled nonminimally to the gravitational sector and in the same time the derivatives of the field are also coupled to the background geometry (Einstein's tensor). This model provides a more realistic framework for treating cosmological inflation in essence. We study in detail the cosmological perturbations and possible non-Gaussianities in the distribution of these perturbations in this nonminimal inflation. We expand the action of the model up to the third order and compare our results with observational data from Planck2015 to see the viability of this extended model. In this manner, we are able to constrain parameter space of the model in comparison with observation.

2. Field Equations

We consider an inflationary model where both a canonical scalar field and its derivatives are coupled nonminimally to gravity. The four-dimensional action for this model is given by the following expression:

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (1)

where [M.sub.p] is a reduced Planck mass, [phi] is a canonical scalar field, f([phi]) is a general function of the scalar field, and [??] is a mass parameter. The energy-momentum tensor is obtained from action (1) as follows:

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (2)

On the other hand, variation of the action (1) with respect to the scalar field gives the scalar field equation of motion as

[1/2] [M.sup.2.sub.p]Rf' ([phi]) - [1/[[??].sup.2]] [G.sup.[mu][nu]][[nabla].sub.[mu]][[nabla].sub.[nu]][phi] - V' ([phi]) = 0, (3)

where a prime denotes derivative with respect to the scalar field. We consider a spatially flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) line element as

d[s.sup.2] = -d[t.sup.2] + [a.sup.2] (t) [[delta].sub.ij]d[x.sup.i]d[x.sup.j], (4)

where a(t) is scale factor. Now, let us assume that f([phi]) = (1/2)[[phi].sup.2]. In this framework, [T.sub.[mu][nu]] leads to the following energy density and pressure for this model, respectively,

[mathematical expression not reproducible] (5)

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (6)

where a dot refers to derivative with respect to the cosmic time. The equations of motion following from action (1) are

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (7)

[mathematical expression not reproducible] (8)

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (9)

The slow-roll parameters in this model are defined as

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (10)

To have inflationary phase, [epsilon] and [eta] should satisfy slow-roll conditions ([epsilon] [much less than] 1, [eta] [much less than] 1). In our setup, we find the following result:

[mathematical expression not reproducible] (11)

and

[eta] = -2[epsilon] - [??]/H[epsilon]. (12)

Within the slow-roll approximation, (7), (8), and (9) can be written, respectively, as

[H.sup.2] [equivalent] 1/3[M.sup.2.sub.p] [-[3/2] [M.sup.2.sub.p][H.sup.2][[phi].sup.2] + V([phi])], (13)

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (14)

and

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (15)

The number of e-folds during inflation is defined as

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (16)

where [t.sub.hc] and [t.sub.e] are time of horizon crossing and end of inflation, respectively. The number of e-folds in the slow-roll approximation in our setup can be expressed as follows:

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (17)

After providing the basic setup of the model, for testing cosmological viability of this extended model, we treat the perturbations in comparison with observation.

3. Second-Order Action: Linear Perturbations

In this section, we study linear perturbations around the homogeneous background solution. To this end, the first step is expanding the action (1) up to the second order in small fluctuations. It is convenient to work in the ADM formalism given by [38]

d[s.sup.2] = -[N.sup.2]d[t.sup.2] + [h.sub.ij] ([N.sup.i]dt + d[x.sup.i]) ([N.sup.j]dt + d[x.sup.j]), (18)

where [N.sup.i] is the shift vector and N is the lapse function. We expand the lapse function and shift vector to N = 1 + 2[PHI] and [N.sup.i] = [[delta].sup.ij][[partial derivative].sub.j]Y, respectively, where [PHI] and Y are three-scalars. Also, [h.sub.ij] = [a.sup.2](t)[(1+2[PSI])[[delta].sub.ij] + [[gamma].sub.ij]], where [PSI] is spatial curvature perturbation and [[gamma].sub.ij] is shear three-tensor which is traceless and symmetric. In the rest of our study, we choose [delta][PHI] = 0 and [[gamma].sub.ij] = 0. By taking into account the scalar perturbations in linear-order, the metric (18) is written as (see, for instance, [39])

d[s.sup.2] = -(1 + 2[PHI]) d[t.sup.2] + 2[[partial derivative].sub.i] Ydtd[x.sup.i] + [a.sup.2] (t) (1 + 2[PSI]) [[delta].sub.ij]d[x.sup.i]d[x.sup.j]. (19)

Now by replacing metric (19) in action (1) and expanding the action up to the second order in perturbations, we find (see, for instance, [40, 41])

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (20)

By variation of action (20) with respect to N and [N.sup.i] we find

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (21)

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (22)

Finally the second-order action can be rewritten as follows:

[S.sup.(2)] = [integral] dtd[x.sup.3] [a.sup.3][[theta].sub.s] [[[??].sup.2] - [[c.sup.2.sub.s]/[a.sup.2]] [([partial derivative][PSI]).sup.2]] (23)

where by definition

[mathematical expression not reproducible] (24)

and

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (25)

In order to obtain quantum perturbations [PSI], we can find equation of motion of the curvature perturbation by varying action (23) which follows

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (26)

By solving the above equation up to the lowest order in slow-roll approximation, we find

[PSI] = [iH exp (-i[c.sub.s]k[tau])]/[2[c.sup.3/2.sub.s] [square root of ([k.sup.3])] [[??].sub.s]] (1 + i[c.sub.s]k[tau]). (27)

By using the two-point correlation functions, we can study power spectrum of curvature perturbation in this setup. We find two-point correlation function by obtaining vacuum expectation value at the end of inflation. We define the power spectrum [P.sub.s], as

<0 | [PSI](0, [k.sub.1]) [PSI] (0, [k.sub.2]) | 0> = [2[[pi].sup.2]/[k.sup.3]] [P.sub.s] [(2[pi]).sup.3] [[delta].sup.3] ([k.sub.1] + [k.sub.2]), (28)

where

[P.sub.s] = [H.sup.2]/8[[pi].sup.2][[??].sub.s][c.sup.3.sub.s]. (29)

The spectral index of scalar perturbations is given by (see [42-44] for more details on the cosmological perturbations in generalized gravity theories and also inflationary spectral index in these theories)

[mathematical expression not reproducible] (30)

where by definition

[mathematical expression not reproducible] (31)

also

[[epsilon].sub.s] = [[theta].sub.s][c.sup.2.sub.s]/[M.sup.2.sub.pl](1 + f). (32)

We obtain finally

[n.sub.s] - 1 = -2[epsilon] - [1/H] [d ln [c.sub.s]]/dt] - [1/H] [d ln [2H(1 + [[phi].sup.2]/2) [epsilon] + [phi][??]]]/dt], (33)

which shows the scale-dependence of perturbations due to deviation of [n.sub.s] from 1.

Now we study tensor perturbations in this setup. To this end, we write the metric as follows:

d[s.sup.2] = -d[t.sup.2] + a[(t).sup.2] ([[delta].sub.ij] + [T.sub.ij])d[x.sup.i]d[x.sup.j], (34)

where [T.sub.ij] is a spatial shear 3-tensor which is transverse and traceless. It is convenient to write [T.sub.ij] in terms of two polarization modes, as follows:

[T.sub.ij] = [T.sub.+][e.sup.+.sub.ij] + [T.sup.x][e.sup.x.sub.ij], (35)

where [e.sup.+.sub.ij] and [e.sup.x.sub.ij] are the polarization tensors. In this case, the second-order action for the tensor mode can be written as

[S.sub.T] = [integral] dtd[x.sup.3] [a.sup.3][[theta].sub.T] [[[??].sup.2.sub.(+,x)] - [c.sup.2.sub.T]/[a.sup.2] [([partial derivative][T.sub.(+,x)]).sup.2]], (36)

where by definition

[mathematical expression not reproducible] (37)

and

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (38)

Now, the amplitude of tensor perturbations is given by

[P.sub.T] = [H.sup.2]/2[[pi].sup.2][[??].sub.T][c.sup.3.sub.T], (39)

where we have defined the tensor spectral index as

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (40)

By using above equations, we get finally

[n.sub.T] = -2[epsilon] - [phi][??]/H(1 + [[phi].sup.2]/2). (41)

The tensor-to-scalar ratio as an important observational quantity in our setup is given by

r = [P.sub.T]/[P.sub.s] = 16[c.sub.s] ([epsilon] + [phi][??]/2H(1 + [[phi].sup.2]/2) + O([[epsilon].sup.2])) [equivalent] -8[c.sub.s][n.sub.T] (42)

which yields the standard consistency relation.

4. Third-Order Action: Non-Gaussianity

Since a two-point correlation function of the scalar perturbations gives no information about possible non-Gaussian feature of distribution, we study higher-order correlation functions. A three-point correlation function is capable of giving the required information. For this purpose, we should expand action (1) up to the third order in small fluctuations around the homogeneous background solutions. In this respect, we obtain

[mathematical expression not reproducible] (43)

We use (21) and (22) for eliminating [PHI] and Y in this relation. For this end, we introduce the quantity [chi] as follows:

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (44)

where

[[partial derivative].sup.2][chi] = [[theta].sub.s][??]. (45)

Now the third-order action (43) takes the following form:

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (46)

By calculating the three-point correlation function, we can study non-Gaussianity feature of the primordial perturbations. For the present model, we use the interaction picture in which the interaction Hamiltonian, [H.sub.int], is equal to the Lagrangian third-order action. The vacuum expectation value of curvature perturbations at [tau] = [[tau].sub.f] is

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (47)

By solving the above integral in Fourier space, we find

<[PSI] ([k.sub.1]) [PSI] ([k.sub.2]) [PSI] ([k.sub.3])> = [(2[pi]).sup.3] [[delta].sup.3] ([k.sub.1] + [k.sub.2] + [k.sub.3]) [P.sup.2.sub.s] [F.sub.[PSI]] ([k.sub.1], [k.sub.2], [k.sub.3]), (48)

where

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (49)

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (50)

and K = [[summation].sub.i] [k.sub.i]. Finally the nonlinear parameter [f.sub.NL] is defined as follows:

[f.sub.NL] = [10/3] [[G.sub.[PSI]]/[[[summation].sup.3.sub.i=1] [k.sub.i]]. (51)

Here we study non-Gaussianity in the orthogonal and the equilateral configurations [45, 46]. Firstly we should account [G.sub.[PSI]] in these configurations. To this end, we follow [19, 47, 48] to introduce a shape [[zeta].sup.equi.sub.*] as [[zeta].sup.equi.sub.*] = -(12/13)(3[[zeta].sub.1] - [[zeta].sub.2]). In this manner we define the following shape which is orthogonal to [[zeta].sup.equi.sub.*]

[[zeta].sup.ortho.sub.*] = -12/[14 - 13[beta]] [[beta] (3[[zeta].sub.1] - [[zeta].sub.2]) + 3[[zeta].sub.1] - [[zeta].sub.2]], (52)

where [beta] [equivalent] 1.1967996. Finally, bispectrum(48) can be written in terms of [[zeta].sup.equi.sub.*] and [[zeta].sup.ortho.sub.*] as follows:

[G.sub.[PSI]] = [G.sub.1][[zeta].sup.equi.sub.*] + [G.sub.2][[zeta].sup.ortho.sub.*], (53)

where

[G.sub.1] = 13/12 [1/24 (1 - 1/[c.sup.2.sub.s])] (2 + 3[beta]) (54)

and

[G.sub.2] = [14 - 13[beta]]/12 [1/8 (1 - 1/[c.sup.2.sub.s])]. (55)

Now, by using (50)-(55) we obtain the amplitude of non-Gaussianity in the orthogonal and equilateral configurations, respectively, as

[f.sup.equi.sub.NL] = 130/[36 [[summation].sup.3.sub.i=1] [k.sup.3.sub.i]] [1/24 (1/[1 - [c.sup.2.sub.s]])] (2 + 3[beta]) [[zeta].sup.equi.sub.*], (56)

and

[f.sup.ortho.sub.NL] = [140 - 130[beta]]/[36 [[summation].sup.3.sub.i=1 [k.sup.3.sub.i] [1/8 (1 - 1/[c.sup.2.sub.s])] [[zeta].sup.ortho.sub.*]. (57)

The equilateral and the orthogonal shape have a negative and a positive peak in [k.sub.1] = [k.sub.2] = [k.sub.3] limit, respectively [49]. Thus, we can rewrite the above equations in this limit as

[f.sup.equi.sub.NL] = 325/18 [1/24 (1/[c.sup.2.sub.s] - 1)](2 + 3[beta]), (58)

and

[f.sup.ortho.sub.NL] = 10/9 [1/8 (1 - 1/[c.sup.2.sub.s])] (7/6 + [65/4] [beta]), (59)

respectively.

5. Confronting with Observation

The previous sections were devoted to the theoretical framework of this extended model. In this section, we compare our model with observational data to find some observational constraints on the model parameter space. In this regard, we introduce a suitable candidate for potential term in the action. (Note that in general [lambda] has dimension related to the Planck mass. This can be seen easily by considering the normalization of [phi] via V([phi]) = (1/n)[lambda][([phi]/[[phi].sub.0]).sup.n] which indicates that [lambda] cannot be dimensionless in general. When we consider some numerical values for [lambda] in our numerical analysis, these values are in "appropriate units".) We adopt V([phi]) = (1/n)[lambda][[phi].sup.n] which contains some interesting inflation models such as chaotic inflation. To be more specified, we consider a quartic potential with n = 4. Firstly we substitute this potential into (11) and then by adopting [epsilon] = 1 we find the inflaton field's value at the end of inflation. Then by solving the integral (17), we find the inflaton field's value at the horizon crossing in terms of number of e-folds, N. Then we substitute [[phi].sub.hc] into (33), (42), (58), and (59). The resulting relations are the basis of our numerical analysis on the parameter space of the model at hand. To proceed with numerical analysis, we study the behavior of the tensor-to-scalar ratio versus the scalar spectral index. In Figure 1, we have plotted the tensor-to-scalar ratio versus the scalar spectral index for N = 60 in the background of Planck2015 data. The trajectory of result in this extended nonminimal inflationary model lies well in the confidence levels of Planck2015 observational data for viable spectral index and r. The amplitude of orthogonal configuration of non-Gaussianity versus the amplitude of equilateral configuration is depicted in Figure 2 for N = 60. We see that this extended nonminimal model, in some ranges of the parameter [lambda], is consistent with observation. If we restrict the spectral index to the observationally viable interval 0.95 < [n.sub.s] < 0.97, then [lambda] is constrained to be in the interval 0.013 < [lambda] < 0.095 in appropriate units. If we restrict the equilateral configuration of non-Gaussianity to the observationally viable condition -147 < [f.sup.equi.sub.NL] < 143, then we find the constraint [lambda] < 0.1 in our setup.

6. Summary and Conclusion

We studied an extended model of single field inflation where the inflaton and its derivatives are coupled to the background geometry. By focusing on the third-order action and nonlinear perturbations, we obtained observables of cosmological inflation, such as tensor-to-scalar ratio and the amplitudes of non-Gaussianities in this extended setup. By confronting the model's outcomes with observational data from Planck2015, we were able to constrain parameter space of the model. By adopting a quartic potential with V([phi]) = (1/4)[lambda][[phi].sup.4], restricting the model to realize observationally viable spectral index (or tensor-to-scalar ratio) imposes the constraint on coupling [lambda] as 0.013 < [lambda] < 0.095. Also restricting the amplitude of equilateral amplitude of non-Gaussianity to the observationally supported value of -147 < [f.sup.equi.sub.NL] < 143 results in the constraint [lambda] < 0.1 in appropriate units.

https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/2343896

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

The work of K. Nozari has been supported financially by Research Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha (RIAAM) under research project no. 1/5750-1.

References

[1] V. F. Mukhanov and G. V. Chibisov, "Quantum fluctuations and a nonsingular universe," JETP Letters, vol. 33, pp. 549-553, 1981.

[2] A. H. Guth, "Inflationary universe: a possible solution to the horizon and flatness problems," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 347-356, 1981.

[3] A. Albrecht and P. J. Steinhardt, "Cosmology for grand unified theories with radiatively induced symmetry breaking," Physical Review Letters, vol. 48, no. 17, pp. 1220-1223, 1982.

[4] A. D. Linde, "A new inflationary universe scenario: A possible solution of the horizon, flatness, homogeneity, isotropy and primordial monopole problems," Physics Letters B, vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 389-393, 1982.

[5] A. A. Starobinsky, "Dynamics of phase transition in the new inflationary universe scenario and generation of perturbations," Physics Letters B, vol. 113, pp. 175-179, 1982.

[6] J. E. Lidsey, A. R. Liddle, E. W. Kolb, E. J. Copeland, T. Barreiro, and M. Abney, "Reconstructing the inflaton potential--an overview," Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 373-410, 1997.

[7] A. Liddle and D. Lyth, Cosmological Inflation and Large-Scale Structure, Cambridge University Press, 2000.

[8] E. Komatsu, K. M. Smith, and J. Dunkley, "Seven-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: cosmological interpretation," The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, vol. 192, no. 2, p. 18, 2011.

[9] J. Martin, "The Observational Status of Cosmic Inflation after Planck," The Cosmic Microwave Background, pp. 41-134, 2016.

[10] J. Martin, "Inflation after Planck: and the winners are," Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics, 2013.

[11] J. M. Maldacena, "Non-Gaussian features of primordial fluctuations in single field inflationary models," Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2003, no. 5, article 013, 2003.

[12] P. A. R. Ade, "Planck 2015 results. XX. Constraints on inflation," Astrophysics: Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics, 2015.

[13] P. A. R. Ade, "Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters," Astrophysics: Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics, 2015.

[14] P. A. R. Ade, "Planck 2015 results. XVII. Constraints on primordial non-Gaussianity," Astrophysics: Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics, 2015.

[15] D. Baumann, "TASI lectures on inflation," High Energy Physics -Theory, 2009.

[16] Y. Wang, "Inflation, cosmic perturbations and non-gaussianities," High Energy Physics -Theory, 2013.

[17] A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, "Generalized Galileon cosmology," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 84, no. 12, 2011.

[18] A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, "Primordial non-Gaussianities in general modified gravitational models of inflation," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2011, no. 4, article 029, 2011.

[19] A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, "Shapes of primordial non-Gaussianities in the Horndeski's most general scalar-tensor theories," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2013, no. 3, article no. 30, 2013.

[20] Q.-G. Huang and Y. Wang, "Large local non-Gaussianity from general ultra slow-roll inflation," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2013, no. 6, article no. 35, 2013.

[21] V. Faraoni, "Inflation and quintessence with nonminimal coupling," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 62, Article ID 023504, 2000.

[22] T. Futamase and K.-I. Maeda, "Chaotic inflationary scenario of the Universe with a nonminimally coupled inflaton field," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 399-404, 1989.

[23] D. S. Salopek, J. R. Bond, and J. M. Bardeen, "Designing density fluctuation spectra in inflation," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1753-1788, 1989.

[24] R. Fakir and W. G. Unruh, "Improvement on cosmological chaotic inflation through nonminimal coupling," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1783-1791, 1990.

[25] N. Makino and M. Sasaki, "The density perturbation in the chaotic inflation with non-minimal coupling," Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics, vol. 86, no. 1, pp. 103-118, 1991.

[26] J. Hwang and H. Noh, "COBE constraints on inflation models with a massive nonminimal scalar field," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 60, no. 12, Article ID 063501, 1999.

[27] S. Tsujikawa and H. Yajima, "New constraints on multifield inflation with nonminimal coupling," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 62, no. 12, 2000.

[28] C. Pallis and N. Toumbas, "Non-minimal sneutrino inflation, Peccei-Quinn phase transition and non-thermal leptogenesis," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2011, no. 2, article 019, 2011.

[29] K. Nozari and S. Shafizadeh, "Non-minimal inflation revisited," Physica Scripta, vol. 2010, no. 8, Article ID 015901, 2010.

[30] C. P. Burgess, H. M. Lee, and M. Trott, "On Higgs inflation and naturalness," Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2010, no. 09 article 103, 2009.

[31] J. L. F. Barbon and J. R. Espinosa, "On the naturalness of Higgs inflation," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 79, no. 8, Article ID081302, 2009.

[32] C. P. Burgess, H. M. Lee, and M. Trott, "On Higgs inflation and naturalness," Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2010, no. 07, 2010.

[33] L. Amendola, "Cosmology with nonminimal derivative couplings," Physics Letters B, vol. 301, no. 2-3, pp. 175-182, 1993.

[34] C. Germani and A. Kehagias, "New model of inflation with nonminimal derivative coupling of standard model higgs boson to gravity," Physical Review Letters, vol. 105, no. 1, Article ID 011302, 2010.

[35] S. Tsujikawa, "Observational tests of inflation with a field derivative coupling to gravity," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 85, Article ID 083518, 2012.

[36] H. M. Sadjadi and P. Goodarzi, "Reheating in non-minimal derivative coupling model," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2013, no. 02, article 038, 2013.

[37] E. N. Saridakis and S. V. Sushkov, "Quintessence and phantom cosmology with nonminimal derivative coupling," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 81, Article ID 083510, 2010.

[38] R. L. Arnowitt, S. Deser, andC. W. Misner, "Canonical variables for general relativity," Physical Review A: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, vol. 117, no. 6, p. 1595, 1960.

[39] V. F. Mukhanov, H. A. Feldman, and R. H. Brandenberger, "Theory of cosmological perturbations," Physics Reports, vol. 215, no. 5-6, pp. 203-333, 1992.

[40] C. Cheung, A. L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan, L. Senatore, and P. Creminelli, "The effective field theory of inflation," Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2008, no. 03, article no. 014, 2008.

[41] D. Seery and J. E. Lidsey, "Primordial non-Gaussianities in single-field inflation," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2005, no. 6, article no. 003, 2005.

[42] J. Hwang and H. Noh, "Cosmological perturbations in generalized gravity theories," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 1460-1473, 1996.

[43] H. Noh and J. Hwang, "Inflationary spectra in generalized gravity: unified forms," Physics Letters B, vol. 515, no. 3-4, pp. 231-237, 2001.

[44] R. Myrzakulov, L. Sebastiani, and S. Vagnozzi, "Inflation in f(R, [phi])-theories and mimetic gravity scenario," The European Physical Journal C, vol. 75, no. 9, 2015.

[45] D. Babich, P. Creminelli, and M. Zaldarriaga, "The shape of non-Gaussianities," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, no. 8, pp. 199-217, 2004.

[46] L. Senatore, M. K. Smith, and M. Zaldarriaga, "Non-Gaussianities in single field inflation and their optimal limits from the WMAP 5-year data," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 1, no. 28, 2010.

[47] J. R. Fergusson and E. P. S. Shellard, "Shape of primordial non-Gaussianity and the CMB bispectrum," Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology, vol. 80, no. 4, Article ID 043510, 2009.

[48] C. T. Byrnes, "Lecture notes on non-Gaussianity," Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics, 2014.

[49] X. Chen, M. X. Huang, S. Kachru, andG. Shiu, "Observational signatures and non-gaussianities of general single field inflation," Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, vol. 2007, no. 1, article no. 02, 2007.

R. Shojaee (iD), (1) K. Nozari (iD), (2,3) and F. Darabi (iD) (1)

(1) Department of Physics, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, P. O. Box 53714-161, Tabriz, Iran

(2) Department of Physics, Faculty of Basic Sciences, University of Mazandaran, P. O. Box 47416-95447, Babolsar, Iran

(3) Research Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha (RIAAM), P. O. Box 55134-441, Maragha, Iran

Correspondence should be addressed to K. Nozari; knozari@umz.ac.ir

Received 23 April 2018; Revised 13 June 2018; Accepted 14 June 2018; Published 15 August 2018

Academic Editor: Elias C. Vagenas

Caption: Figure 1: Tensor-to-scalar ratio versus the scalar spectral index in the background of Planck2015 TT, TE, and EE+lowP data.

Caption: Figure 2: The amplitude of the orthogonal configuration versus the amplitude of the equilateral configuration of non-Gaussianity in the background of Planck2015 TTT, EEE, TTE, and EET data.
COPYRIGHT 2018 Hindawi Limited
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2018 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Research Article
Author:Shojaee, R.; Nozari, K.; Darabi, F.
Publication:Advances in High Energy Physics
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Jan 1, 2018
Words:4460
Previous Article:Inflation in f(R, [phi]) Gravity with Exponential Model.
Next Article:Neutral-Current Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering off Xe Isotopes.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |