MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413220318 · doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/032

On the Hamilton-Jacobi approach to inflation beyond slow roll

2025· article· en· W4413220318 on OpenAlexaff
Danilo Artigas, Emmanuel Frion, Tays Miranda, Vincent Vennin, David Wands

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicCosmology and Gravitation Theories
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersScience and Technology Facilities CouncilJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceYukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kyoto UniversityUniversity of Portsmouth
KeywordsPhysicsCosmological perturbation theoryInflation (cosmology)InflatonAttractorAdiabatic processClassical mechanicsScalar (mathematics)Slow rollScalar fieldGravitationTheoretical physicsStatistical physicsQuantum mechanicsGeometryMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Hamilton-Jacobi approach is a powerful tool to describe super-Hubble dynamics during cosmological inflation in a non-linear way. A key assumption of this framework is to neglect anisotropic perturbations on large scales. We show that neglecting the anisotropic sector in the momentum constraint corresponds to discarding the non-adiabatic mode of scalar-field perturbations at large scales. Consequently, the Hamilton-Jacobi approach cannot be used to describe the evolution of large-scale perturbations during inflation beyond slow roll, when non-adiabatic fluctuations play an important role on super-Hubble scales due to the absence of an attractor trajectory. As an example, we analyse the case of cosmological perturbations during a phase of ultra-slow-roll inflation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmology and Astroparticle PhysicsSame topicCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesFrench-language works237,207