A fresh set of eyes on the validity of analytic tools
In the age of precision cosmology we aim to make predictions at the level of ≪1% . An important discovery was made during our research, namely the discrepancy between what current analytic tools predict, and what brute force numerics yield. Our numeric tools were rigorously benchmarked against known fully analytic cases, and are precise to a level of better than ∼0.01% . As a results we take our numerical package to yield precise results, and deem the current analytic tools (derived with several approximations and assumptions) insufficient. We delve deeper into the source of said discrepancy and lay some much needed framework to correctly assess CMB observables, given inflationary slow roll potentials, at the level precision cosmology requires.
Ira Wolfson and Ramy Brustein. "Small field models with gravitational wave signature supported by CMB data" PLoS ONE (2018) .
As well as ongoing work.