2406.17030
Analytic bounds on late-time axion-scalar cosmologies
Gary Shiu, Flavio Tonioni, Hung V. Tran
correctmedium confidence
- Category
- Not specified
- Journal tier
- Strong Field
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
The paper states and (in App. A) rigorously proves the late‑time bounds for axion–scalar cosmologies under three geometric regimes: antialignment (γ∞·λr<0), alignment with πr≥0 and componentwise nonnegativity, and partial misalignment. In particular it establishes ϵ=(d−2)/4 (γ∞)² when (γ∞)²≤Γ(d)², and ϵ→d−1 when (γ∞)²≥Γ(d)² in the antialignment case (eqs. (II.6)–(II.7)) ; bounds ϵ≤(d−2)/4 (Γ̃)² and ϵ≤(d−2)/4 (Γ·Γ̃) under alignment hypotheses (eqs. (II.8)–(II.13)) ; and kination ϵ=d−1 under partial misalignment (eq. (II.14)) . The model’s outline reproduces these final conclusions but relies on several unjustified or incorrect steps: (i) in A1 it tries to exclude V/H²→0 by bounding 2(d−1)−g·u using |g|≥|γ∞|≤Γ(d), which goes in the wrong direction and does not control g away from the minimal face; (ii) in C it asserts a directional lower bound g·u≥(γa*+Λa*)|ua*| that does not follow from convexity and mixes the axion couplings into g·u without justification; and (iii) in B it assumes eventual sign‑definiteness u_a≥0 from a heuristic comparison argument. The paper’s statements and proofs (summarized around eqs. (II.2)–(II.5) and detailed in App. A) are consistent and complete within their stated hypotheses, whereas the model’s derivations contain gaps .
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions \textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field \textbf{Justification:} The paper provides rigorous, geometry-driven late-time bounds for axion–scalar cosmologies with exponential potentials and kinetic couplings. The results extend prior convex-hull bounds to curved field spaces, are stated cleanly, and are supported by proofs in the appendix. The claims are carefully framed by explicit hypotheses (rank, positivity, convex-hull geometry), and examples illustrate applicability. Minor clarifications would improve accessibility but do not affect correctness.