Renormalization-group improved inflationary scalar electrodynamics and SU (5) scenarios confronted with Planck 2013 and BICEP2 results

E. Elizalde, S. D. Odintsov, E. O. Pozdeeva, S. Yu Vernov

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

    37 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    © 2014 American Physical Society. The possibility to construct inflationary models for the renormalization-group (RG) improved potentials corresponding to scalar electrodynamics and to SU(2) and SU(5) models is investigated. In all cases, the tree-level potential, which corresponds to the cosmological constant in the Einstein frame, is seen to be nonsuitable for inflation. Rather than adding the Hilbert-Einstein term to the action, quantum corrections to the potential, coming from the RG equation, are included. The inflationary scenario is analyzed with unstable de Sitter solutions that correspond to positive values of the coupling function, only. We show that, for the finite SU(2) model and SU(2) gauge model, there are no de Sitter solutions suitable for inflation, unless exit from it occurs according to some weird, nonstandard scenarios. Inflation is realized both for scalar electrodynamics and for SU(5) RG-improved potentials, and the corresponding values of the coupling function are seen to be positive. It is shown that, for quite reasonable values of the parameters, the inflationary models obtained both from scalar electrodynamics and from the SU(5) RG-improved potentials are in good agreement with the most recent observational data coming from the Planck 2013 and BICEP2 collaborations.
    Original languageEnglish
    Article number084001
    JournalPhysical Review D - Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology
    Volume90
    Issue number8
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2014

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Renormalization-group improved inflationary scalar electrodynamics and SU (5) scenarios confronted with Planck 2013 and BICEP2 results'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this