- Open Access
Ultraviolet Completion of the Big Bang in Quadratic Gravity
Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 111501 – Published 18 March, 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/6gtx-j455
Abstract
We present a quantum quadratic gravity inflationary scenario that can accommodate the new cosmological constraints, which have disfavored Starobinsky inflation. The theory is asymptotically free in the ultraviolet, but 1-loop running is found to dynamically lead to slow-roll inflation toward the infrared. When a large number of matter fields contribute to the beta functions, the spectral index and the tensor-to-scalar ratio can be phenomenologically viable. We find that as inflation ends, the theory approaches its strong coupling regime and general relativity must emerge, as an effective field theory, as the universe must reheat and enter its standard radiation era. In order to avoid strong coupling, a minimum tensor-to-scalar ratio of 0.01 is predicted for this theory. Our framework offers a laboratory for connecting a concrete ultraviolet completion (quantum quadratic gravity) with inflationary dynamics, reheating, and precise cosmological observations.
Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)
Article Text
Supplemental Material
References (86)
- C. P. Burgess, Living Rev. Relativity 7, 5 (2004).
We use the mostly positive metric signature. We contract tensor indices with the metric , whose determinant is and Ricci scalar . Finally, we use natural units, and denotes the reduced Planck mass.
- G. ’t Hooft and M. J. G. Veltman, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincare A 20, 69 (1974), https://www.numdam.org/item/AIHPA_1974__20_1_69_0/.
- S. M. Christensen and M. J. Duff, Nucl. Phys. B170, 480 (1980).
- M. H. Goroff and A. Sagnotti, Nucl. Phys. B266, 709 (1986).
- K. S. Stelle, Phys. Rev. D 16, 953 (1977).
- B. Holdom and J. Ren, Phys. Rev. D 95, 084034 (2017).
- R. Liu, J. Quintin, and N. Afshordi, Phys. Rev. D 111, 044031 (2025).
- A. Salvio, Front. Phys. 6, 77 (2018).
- A. A. Starobinsky, Phys. Lett. 91B, 99 (1980).
The action of quadratic gravity can generically be written as such up to boundary and topological terms (see, e.g., Ref. [9]).
- K. Hinterbichler and M. Saravani, Phys. Rev. D 93, 065006 (2016).
- S. W. Hawking and T. Hertog, Phys. Rev. D 65, 103515 (2002).
- P. D. Mannheim and A. Davidson, Phys. Rev. A 71, 042110 (2005).
- P. D. Mannheim, Found. Phys. 37, 532 (2007).
- C. M. Bender and P. D. Mannheim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 110402 (2008).
- J. F. Donoghue, Phys. Rev. D 96, 044007 (2017).
- J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D 97, 126005 (2018).
- J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D 100, 105006 (2019).
- J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 171601 (2019).
- J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 115, 103812 (2020).
- J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D 104, 045010 (2021).
- J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2021) 010.
- J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Nuovo Cimento Soc. Ital. Fis. 45C, 26 (2022).
- J. D. Edelstein, R. Ghosh, A. Laddha, and S. Sarkar, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2021) 150.
- A. Hell, D. Lust, and G. Zoupanos, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2023) 168.
- B. Holdom, Phys. Lett. B 843, 138023 (2023).
- B. Holdom, Nucl. Phys. B1000, 116472 (2024).
- B. Holdom, Nucl. Phys. B1008, 116696 (2024).
- J. D. Edelstein, R. Ghosh, A. Laddha, and S. Sarkar, arXiv:2409.16935.
- A. Salvio, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2024) 092.
- G. Lambiase, S. Mukohyama, T. K. Poddar, and A. C. Rescigno, arXiv:2510.17789.
- T. Clunan and M. Sasaki, Classical Quantum Gravity 27, 165014 (2010).
- N. Deruelle, M. Sasaki, Y. Sendouda, and A. Youssef, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2011) 040.
- N. Deruelle, M. Sasaki, Y. Sendouda, and A. Youssef, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2012) 009.
- D. Anselmi, E. Bianchi, and M. Piva, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2020) 211.
- A. De Felice, R. Kawaguchi, K. Mizui, and S. Tsujikawa, Phys. Rev. D 108, 123524 (2023).
- J. Kubo and J. Kuntz, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2025) 093.
- E. Bianchi and M. Gamonal, Phys. Rev. D 112, 124006 (2025).
- L. Buoninfante, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2025) 175.
- E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, Nucl. Phys. B201, 469 (1982).
- I. G. Avramidi and A. O. Barvinsky, Phys. Lett. 159B, 269 (1985).
- A. Codello and R. Percacci, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 221301 (2006).
- M. R. Niedermaier, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 101303 (2009).
- M. Niedermaier, Nucl. Phys. B833, 226 (2010).
- N. Ohta and R. Percacci, Classical Quantum Gravity 31, 015024 (2014).
- B. Holdom and J. Ren, Phys. Rev. D 93, 124030 (2016).
- B. Holdom and J. Ren, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 25, 1643004 (2016).
- T. de Boer, J. Kubo, M. Lindner, and M. Reinig, arXiv:2510.12882.
- D. Buccio, J. F. Donoghue, G. Menezes, and R. Percacci, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 021604 (2024).
- H. Kawai and N. Ohta, Phys. Lett. B 855, 138863 (2024).
- D. Buccio, L. Parente, and O. Zanusso, Phys. Rev. D 111, 065022 (2025).
- H. Kawai and N. Ohta, Phys. Lett. B 868, 139781 (2025).
- A. Salvio, A. Strumia, and M. Vitti, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2026) 250.
- See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/6gtx-j455 for details of the calculations pertaining to the renormalization group equations, the cosmological evolution in the Jordan frame, the cosmological perturbations in the Einstein frame, and reheating.
- R. Percacci and G. P. Vacca, arXiv:2502.13931.
- A. Hell, D. Lust, and G. Zoupanos, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2024) 039.
- A. Hell and D. Lust, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2025) 202.
- D. M. Capper and M. J. Duff, Nuovo Cimento Soc. Ital. Fis. 23A, 173 (1974).
- M. J. Duff, Classical Quantum Gravity 11, 1387 (1994).
- J. B. Hartle and S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D 28, 2960 (1983).
- A. Vilenkin, Phys. Lett. 117B, 25 (1982).
The natural possibility of a “creation out of nothing” is a compelling one here, but it certainly deserves further investigation. In particular, finding proper instanton solutions and analyzing the path integral of QQG would constitute interesting follow-up work.
One may question how large can reasonably be. In theoretical settings, such as holography, is often taken to be arbitrarily large, to ensure perturbative gravity in the bulk. Here, we remain agnostic about whether or not a very large represents a fine-tuning problem. We should further note that these matter fields would probably end up being confined to the UV, together with all the degrees of freedom of QQG, in a similar fashion to quarks and gluons in QCD.
Here, we ignore the impact of the running of the coupling to Gauss-Bonnet’s invariant , which is not widely studied due to its topological nature. However, this may affect cosmological evolution—as in theories, which are widely studied in the literature, e.g., [66]—but we defer that consideration to future work.
- G. Cognola, E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and S. Zerbini, Phys. Rev. D 73, 084007 (2006).
- I. L. Buchbinder, S. D. Odintsov, and I. L. Shapiro, Effective Action in Quantum Gravity (Routledge, New York, 1992).
- E. Elizalde and S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Lett. B 303, 240 (1993).
- E. Elizalde and S. D. Odintsov, Z. Phys. C 64, 699 (1994).
- R. Myrzakulov, S. Odintsov, and L. Sebastiani, Phys. Rev. D 91, 083529 (2015).
- D. Glavan and T. Prokopec, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2023) 063.
Note that during the slow-roll phase of inflation, due to the near de Sitter nature of spacetime, different choices of curvature invariants for the RG scale are generically equivalent to the Ricci scalar. However, they will start to differ as we approach the end of inflation, and thus, they could lead to different reheating mechanisms in the strongly coupled regime.
The contribution from the Weyl tensor vanishes on a homogeneous and isotropic background. This is not true once cosmological perturbations are introduced. Still, contributions from the Weyl tensor to, e.g., tensor perturbations are usually highly suppressed [34], and we do not expect this result to be affected by small logarithmic running.
- J. Martin, C. Ringeval, and V. Vennin, Phys. Dark Universe 5–6, 75 (2014).
- P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck Collaboration), Astron. Astrophys. 571, A22 (2014).
- Y. Akrami et al. (Planck Collaboration), Astron. Astrophys. 641, A10 (2020).
- T. Louis et al. (Atacama Cosmology Telescope Collaboration), J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 062.
- E. Camphuis et al. (SPT-3G Collaboration), arXiv:2506.20707.
- P. A. R. Ade et al. (BICEP Collaboration and Keck Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 151301 (2021).
- A. G. Adame et al. (DESI Collaboration), J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2025) 021.
- E. G. M. Ferreira, E. McDonough, L. Balkenhol, R. Kallosh, L. Knox, and A. Linde, Phys. Rev. D 113, 043524 (2026).
Cold dark matter with a cosmological constant () refers to the standard model of cosmology, while the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder [83, 84] parametrization for dynamical dark energy (often called ) stands as an alternative where the dark-energy equation of state depends linearly on the cosmological scale factor. The recent BAO data of DESI point toward a slight preference for the latter [80].
- M. Chevallier and D. Polarski, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 10, 213 (2001).
- E. V. Linder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 091301 (2003).
- N. Afshordi, C. Coriano, L. Delle Rose, E. Gould, and K. Skenderis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 041301 (2017).
- P. McFadden and K. Skenderis, Phys. Rev. D 81, 021301 (2010).