Dynamics of Polynomial Chaplygin

Gas Warm Inflation

arXiv:1711.03879v1 [gr-qc] 10 Nov 2017

Abdul Jawad ∗
Department of Mathematics, COMSATS Institute of Information
Technology, Lahore-54000, Pakistan.
Shahid Chaudhary †
Department of Mathematics, Sharif College of Engineering
and Technology, Lahore-54000, Pakistan.
Nelson Videla ‡
Instituto de Fı́sica, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaı́so.
Avda. Universidad 330, Curauma, Valparaı́so, Chile.

Abstract
In the present work, we study the consequences of considering a re-
cently proposed polynomial inflationary potential in the context of the
generalized, modified, and generalized cosmic Chaplygin gas models.
In addition, we consider dissipative effects by coupling the inflation
field to radiation, i.e., the inflationary dynamics is studied in the warm
inflation scenario. We take into account a general parametrization of
the dissipative coefficient Γ for describing the decay of the inflaton
field into radiation. By studying the background and perturbative
dynamics in the weak and strong dissipative regimes of warm infla-
tion separately for the positive and negative quadratic and quartic
potentials, we obtain expressions for the most relevant inflationary
observables as the scalar power spectrum, the scalar spectral, and the
tensor-to-scalar ratio. We construct the trajectories in the ns −r plane
∗
abduljawad@ciitlahore.edu.pk, jawadab181@yahoo.com
†
shahidpeak00735@gmail.com
‡
nelson.videla@pucv.cl

1
 for several expressions of the dissipative coefficient and compare with
the two-dimensional marginalized contours for (ns , r) from the latest
Planck data. We find that our results are in agreement with WMAP9
and Planck 2015 data.

Keywords: Warm inflation; Chaplygin gas models; Generalized dissipa-

tive regime; Quadratic and quartic potentials; Inflationary scenario.

1 Introduction
The anisotropies observed in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) are
compatible with an adiabatic primordial scalar perturbation which is nearly
Gaussian with a nearly scale-invariant power spectrum [1]. Cosmic infla-
tion is the most successful theoretical framework in describing the very early
stages of universe and also solves some shortcomings of the hot big-bang
model, such as horizon, flatness and monopole [2] problems. However, the
key feature of inflation is that it may be able to generate a causal mecha-
nism to explain the large scale structure (LSS) of the universe [3] and the
origin of the anisotropies observed in the CMB, since primordial density per-
turbations may be sourced from quantum fluctuations of the inflaton scalar
field during the inflationary expansion. The standard cold inflation scenario
[4]-[7] is divided into two regimes: the slow-roll and reheating phases. In
the slow-roll period the universe undergoes an accelerated expansion as the
potential energy of the inflaton field dominates over its kinetic energy and
all interactions of the inflaton scalar field with other field degrees of freedom
are typically neglected. Subsequently, a reheating period is invoked to end
the brief acceleration. During reheating, kinetic energy of the inflaton field
becomes comparable to its potential energy and by transferring its energy
to massless particles, it oscillates around the minimum of the potential. Af-
ter reheating, the universe is filled with relativistic particles and then the
universe enters in the radiation big-bang epoch.
Alternatively, there is another dynamical mechanism for obtain a success-
ful slow-roll inflation, i.e., the warm inflation scenario [8]-[12]. As opposed
to standard cold inflation, warm inflation has the essential feature that a
reheating phase is avoided at the end of the accelerated expansion due to the
decay of the inflaton into radiation and particles during the slow-roll phase.
However, the key difference is the origin of the density fluctuations. In the
warm inflation scenario, a thermalized radiation component is present at

2
temperature T , which T > H, where H is the Hubble rate. In this way, the
inflaton fluctuations δφ are predominantly thermal instead quantum [8]-[12].
Regarding standard cold inflation, Linde [13] introduced the concept of
chaotic inflation in order to interpret the initial conditions for scalar field
driving inflation which may help in solving the persisting problems of the
old inflation models. In this model, the inflaton potential was chosen to be
2
quadratic or quartic form, i.e. m2 φ2 or λ4 φ4 , terms that are always present
in the scalar potential of the Higgs sector in all renormalizable gauge field
theories [14] in which the gauge symmetry is spontaneously broken via the
Englert-Brout-Higgs mechanism [15, 16]. Such models are interesting for
their simplicity, and has become one of the most favored, because they predict
a significant amount of tensor perturbations due to the inflaton field gets
across the trans-Planckian distance during inflation [17].
After introducing chaotic inflation, several works have been done in this
direction. Herrera [18] discussed the warm inflation by assuming the chaotic
potential in loop quantum cosmology and found consistency of results with
observational data. The warm inflation was also investigated by del Campo
and Herrera [19] driving by a scalar field with canonical kinetic term and
a power-law dependence in the inflaton field for the dissipative coefficient,
i.e., Γ ∝ φn , in the generalized Chaplygin gas (GCG) scenario. Further,
Setare and Kamali investigated warm inflation driving by a tachyonic field
and assumed the scale factor evolves according to intermediate [20] and loga-
mediate [21] models. On the other hand, Bastero-Gill et al. [22] obtained
analytic expressions for the dissipative coefficient in supersymmetric (SUSY)
models and found that their results provide a realization of warm inflation in
SUSY field theories. After, Bastero-Gill et al. [23] have also explored chaotic
inflation by assuming the quartic potential. On the other hand, Herrera et
al. studied intermediate inflation in the context of GCG using standard and
tachyon scalar field models [24]. More recently, in Ref.[25], it was studied
the dynamics of warm inflation in a modified Chaplygin gas (MCG).
Panotopoulos and Videla [26] discussed the warm inflation by assuming
the quartic potential and an inflaton decay rate proportional to temperature
and found that their results are in agreement with the latest Planck data,
obtaining a lower value for the tensor-to-scalar ratio compared to the cold
inflation scenario. Going further, several authors have investigated the warm
inflation scenario in various alternative/modified theories of gravity [27, 28].
Moreover, a new family of inflation models is being developed named as shaft
inflation [29]. In Ref.[30], the authors have developed inflationary parameters

3
by considering shaft potential and tachyon scalar field and found that their
results are consistent with current observational data. Recently, Kobayashi
and Seto [31] investigated the polynomial warm inflation and reported that
their results are consistence with BICEP2 and Planck data.
The main goal of the present paper is to study the consequences of con-
sidering a polynomial inflationary potential in the context of the generalized,
modified, and generalized cosmic Chaplygin gas models. In addition, we
consider dissipative effects by coupling the inflation field to radiation, i.e.,
the inflationary dynamics will be studied in the warm inflation scenario. We
take into account a general parametrization of the dissipative coefficient Γ
for describing the decay of the inflaton field into radiation. The outline of the
paper is as follows: In the next section, we provide the basic set of equations
describing the warm inflationary scenario. In section 3, 4 and 5, we obtain
the several inflationary observables in view of GCG, modified Chaplygin gas
(MCG), and generalized cosmic Chaplygin gas (GCCG) models for posi-
tive/negative quadratic and quartic potentials. In section 6, we summarize
our findings and present our conclusions.

2 Basics of warm inflation scenario

2.1 Background evolution
The Friedmann equation for flat FRW universe in the presence of standard
scalar field an a radiation fluid takes the following form
1
H2 = (ρφ + ργ ) , (1)
3Mp 2

where Mp = √1 is the reduced Planck mass. The energy density of stan-

8πG
dard scalar field can be defined as ρφ = φ̇2 /2 + V (φ) where dots represent
derivative with respect to cosmic time. On the other hand, ργ corresponds
to the energy density of radiation fluid. The corresponding conservation
equations for both standard scalar field and radiations turn out to be

ρ̇φ + 3H(ρφ + pφ ) = −Γφ̇2 , ρ̇γ + 4H(ργ ) = Γφ̇2 , (2)

where pφ denotes the pressure of standard scalar field, given by pφ = φ̇2 /2 −

V (φ). By replacing the expressions for energy densities for the scalar field as

4
well as radiation in the first conservation equation, we get
φ̈ + (3H + Γ)φ̇ + V 0 = 0, (3)
where the primes denote derivatives with respect to φ. On the other hand, Γφ̇
denotes the interaction term between the scalar field and radiation, whereas
Γ is the responsible for the decay of the scalar field into radiation. This
inflaton decay rate may depend on scalar field and temperature of thermal
bath, or both quantities, or even it can be a constant. During warm inflation,
the production of radiation is quasi-stable, i.e., ρ̇γ  4Hργ and ρ̇γ  Γφ̇2
[3, 32]-[35]. This implies that energy density related to scalar field dominates
over the energy density of radiation field and hence, the equations of motion
under slow-roll approximation turn out to be
3H(1 + R)φ̇ ' −V 0 , 4Hργ ' Γφ̇2 , (4)
Γ
where R = 3H
characterizes two dissipative regimes such as weak (R  1)
and strong (R  1). A general parametrization of the inflaton decay rate is
given by
Tn
Γ = c n−1 , (5)
φ
where c is a constant parameter and n is an integer [36, 37]. Several expres-
sions for the dissipative coefficient, corresponding to different values of n,
have been studied in the literatue [38, 39]. On the other hand, the energy
density of the radiation field can be written as ργ = C∗ T 4 , with C∗ = π 2 g∗ /30
and g∗ represents the number of relativistic degrees of freedom. In minimal
SUSY standard model, g∗ = 228.75 and C∗ ' 70 . By using Eq.(4) and
ργ ∝ T 4 , we may find an expression for the temperature of thermal bath
which is given by
 14
ΓV 02

T = . (6)
62 C∗ H 3 (1 + R)2
The set of slow-roll parameters for warm inflation is given by [32]
−Ḣ −Ḧ −1 d
= 2
, η= , β= (ln Γ). (7)
H H Ḣ H dt
The number of e-folds is defined as
Z tend
N= Hdt. (8)
t∗
where t∗ and tend denote the moment when the cosmological scales crosses
the Hubble-radius and the end of inflation, respectively.

5
2.2 Cosmological perturbations
In the warm inflation scenario, a thermalized radiation component is present
with T > H, then the inflaton fluctuations δφ are predominantly thermal
instead quantum. In this way, following Ref.[12], the amplitude of the power
spectrum of the curvature perturbation is given by
1/2
3H 2
   
H 5/4 T
PR ' (1 + R) , (9)
2π V0 H

where the normalization has been chosen in order to recover the standard
cold inflation result when R → 0 and T ' H.
By the other hand, the scalar spectral index ns , to leading order in the
slow-roll approximation, becomes
dPR 9 3η 9β
ns = 1 + '1− + − , (10)
dlnk 4 2 4
while for the tensor-to-scalar ratio, we have that [12]
 
H 16
r' . (11)
T (1 + R)5/2

When a specific form of the scalar potential and the dissipative coeffi-
cient are considered, it is possible to study the background evolution under
the slow-roll regime and the primordial perturbations in order to test the
viability of warm inflation. In the following we will study a polynomial po-
tential, which has quadratic and quartic powers of the inflaton scalar field.
A generalized expressions for the polynomial potential is proposed in [31],
given by
V = t1 + t2 φ2 + t4 φ4 . (12)
Since it is not easy to deal with several parameters, for convenience, we
consider terms up to φ4 which might be motivated by the renormalizability
for this potential in quantum field theory. Thus, we consider two kind of
polynomial potentials:

• Negative quadratic and quartic potential

1 λ∗
V = s − σ 2 φ2 + φ4 , V 0 = −σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 (13)
2 4

6
 • Positive quadratic and quartic potential

1 λ∗
V = σ 2 φ2 + φ4 , V 0 = σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 (14)
2 4
where s, λ∗ and σ are arbitrary constants. In the following sections, we
illustrate the inflationary parameters for above mentioned scenario in the
presence of three Chaplygin gas models (GCG, MCG and GCCG) by assum-
ing weak and strong dissipative regimes with the inflaton decay rate given
by the generalized expression (5).

3 Generalized Chaplygin Gas Model

It is believed that the universe undergoes an accelerated expansion of the
universe and an exotic component having a negative pressure, usually known
as dark energy (DE), is responsible for this expansion. Several models have
been already proposed to be DE candidates, such as cosmological constant
[40], quintessence [41]-[43], k-essence [44]-[46], tachyon [47]-[49], phantom
[50]-[52], Chaplygin gas [53], holographic DE [56], among others in order
to modify the matter sector of the gravitational action. Despite the plenty
of models, the nature of the dark sector of the universe, i.e. DE and dark
matter, is still unknown. There exists another way of understanding the
observed universe in which dark matter and DE are described by a single
unified component. Particularly, CG contains the unification of DE and
dark matter and behaves as a pressureless matter at the early times and like
a cosmological constant at late times [53]. It is noted that CG describes the
universe in agreement with current observations of cosmic acceleration. The
GCG is the extended form of CG and its equation of state (EoS) is [53]

C1
pgcg = − (15)
ραgcg

where pgcg and ρgcg represent the pressure and energy density of GCG model,
respectively, with 0 < α ≤ 1 and C1 is the positive constant [53]. Also, ρgcg
can be obtained through conservation equation as follows
 1
 1+α
C2
ρgcg = C1 + , (16)
a3(1+α)

7
here C2 is positive constant after integration. In this way, the term propor-
tional to a−3 is identified as the energy density of matter ρm .
In order to obtain inflation in the Chaplygin-like gas scenarios studied
in the present work, we follow Ref.[54]. The energy density of matter ρm
is identified with the contribution of the energy density associated to the
standard scalar field ρφ through an extrapolation of Eq.(16), yielding
1 1
ρgcg = (C1 + ρ1+α
m )
1+α −→ (C1 + ρ1+α
φ )
1+α . (17)

In this sense, we will not consider Eq.(17) as a consequence of Eq.(16),

but a non-covariant modification of gravity instead, resulting in a modified
Friedmann equation, as it was pointed up in Ref.[55].
In this scenario, we consider a spatially flat universe which contains a
self-interacting inflation field φ and a radiation field, then the Friedmann
equation (1) turns out to be
 
2 1 1
1+α 1+α
H = (C1 + ρφ ) + ργ . (18)
3Mp2

We stress that Friedmann equation (18) comes from a non-covariant mod-

ification of gravity. However, as it was pointed up in Ref.[54], it may assumed
that the effect giving rise to Eq. (18) preserves diffeomorphism invariance in
(3+1) dimensions, whence total stress-energy conservation follows.
During inflation, the energy density of the scalar field dominates the
energy density of the radiation field, i.e., ρφ ργ which leads to ρφ ∼ V . Here
we take α = 1 for the sake of simplicity. Then the Friedmann equation (18)
becomes

2 1 q 2 1 p
H = C 1 + ρφ ∼ C1 + V 2 . (19)
3Mp2 3Mp2
Further, we will construct the inflationary parameters under two cases of
dissipative coefficient that is weak dissipative regime (R ≤ 1) and strong
dissipative regime (R ≥ 1) for the present case of GCG.

3.1 Weak Dissipative Regime

02 1
For this case, temperature turns out to be T = ( 62 C∗cV H 3 φn−1
) 4−n in the pres-
n
ence of generalized dissipative coefficient Γ = c φTn−1 . With this temperature

8
and weak dissipative regime condition, the slow roll parameters (7) in terms
of potential (V ) can be written as
Mp2 V V 02 Mp2 V 02 3V V 02
 
00
 = 3 , η= 1 V + − ,
2(C1 + V 2 ) 2 (C1 + V 2 ) 2 V 2(C1 + V 2 )

β = Mp 2(C1 + V 2 )(2nV 00 − nV 0 (n − 1)φ−1 − V 0 (4 − n)(n − 1)
2

 −1
−1 02 2 23
× φ ) − 3nV V 2(C1 + V ) (4 − n) .

With the help of Eq.(8), the number of e-folds become

Z φe √
1 C1 + V 2
N= 2 dφ.
Mp φend V0
Equations (9)-(11) provide the power spectrum, scalar spectral index and
tensor-to-scalar ratio in terms of potential (V ) as follow
3(5−2n) 3
 π  12 9 (C1 + V 2 ) 4(4−n) c 4−n
PR = 3(5−2n) n+2
,
4 3(5−2n)
4−n 0 6−3n
(n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2
2(4−n)
3 Mp
2(4−n) V φ 4−n 6 C∗ 2(4−n) 4−n

3Mp2 02
  
−9V V 3
ns − 1 = 1 2
− 2(C1 + V 2 ) 2nV 00
2
2(C1 + V ) 2 4(C 1 + V ) 2
 
0 −1 0 −1 02
− nV (n − 1)φ − V (4 − n)(n − 1)φ − 3nV V
−1
V 02
 
2 00
× 2(C1 + V )(4 − n) +V + ,
V
6−3n (n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2 7−4n
n+2 7−4n
32G V0
4−n
φ 2(4−n) 6 4−n C∗2(4−n) 3 2(4−n) Mp4−n
r = 3 3 7−4n . (20)
9c 4−n π 2 (C1 + V 2 ) 4(4−n)
For positive quadratic and quartic potential: The above expressions of r and
ns in terms of scalar field lead to
  6−3n
4−n
n+2
(n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2 7−4n
2 3
r = 32G σ φ + λ∗ φ φ 2(4−n) 6 4−n C∗2(4−n) 3 2(4−n)
 2 2 4
−1
7−4n
4−n
3 3 σ φ λ ∗ φ 2 4(4−n)
7−4n
× Mp 9c 4−n π 2 (C1 + ( + )) ,
2 4

9
 3Mp2 σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2

ns − 1 = σ 2 φ2 φ4 1 + − 9( )(σ φ
2(C1 + ( 2 + λ∗4 )2 ) 22 4
−1
σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2 σ 2 φ2
 
3 2 3
+ λ∗ φ ) 4(C1 + ( + )) − 2(C1 + (
2 4 2 2
4
λ∗ φ 2
+ ) )(2n(σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 ) − n(σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )(n − 1)φ−1
4
− (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )(4 − n)(n − 1)φ−1 ) − 3n(σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2
σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2
× ( + )(2(2(C1 + ( + ) ))(4
2  4 2 4 
(σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2
− n))−1 + (σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 ) + σ2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 .
( 2 + 4 )

For negative quadratic and quartic potential: The expressions of r and ns for
negative potential turn out to be
6−3n n+2
4−n (n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2 7−4n 7−4n
32G (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) φ 2(4−n) 6 4−n C∗2(4−n) 3 2(4−n) Mp 4−n
r =  7−4n ,
3
 3
2  4(4−n)
σ 2 φ2 4
λ∗ φ
9c π C1 + s −
4−n 2
2
+ 4

3Mp2 σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4

ns = 1 + σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2 21
− 9(s − + )
2(C1 + (s − + )) 2 4
2 4
2 2
2 3 2 σ φ λ∗ φ4 2 −1 3
× (−σ φ + λ∗ φ ) (4(C1 + (s − + ) )) −
2 4 2
σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2

× 2(C1 + (s − + ) )(2n(−σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 ) − n
2 4
× (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )(n − 1)φ−1 − (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )(4 − n)
σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4
× (n − 1)φ−1 ) − 3n(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 (s − + )
2  4
σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2
× (2(2(C1 + (s − + ) ))(4 − n))−1 + (−σ 2
2 4
(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2

2
+ 3λ∗ φ ) + 2 2 4 .
(s − σ 2φ + λ∗4φ )

10
3.2 Strong Dissipative Regime
02 n−1 1
In this case, the temperature becomes T = ( V4ccφ∗ H ) n+4 . The slow-roll pa-
rameters lead to
Mp2 V V 02 Mp2 V 02 3V V 02
 
00
 = 3 , η= 1 V + − ,
2R(C1 + V 2 ) 2 R(C1 + V 2 ) 2 V 2(C1 + V 2 )
nMP2 4V 00 (C1 + V 2 ) − V V 02
β = ( 3 ).
(n + 4)R 2(C1 + V 2 ) 2

The power spectrum, scalar spectral index and tenor-to-scalar ratio turn out
to be
23−5n 23−5n
 π  12 c 10 (C1 + V 2 ) 40
PR = 8−5n 23−5n 23−5n , 5n+2
4 V0 5 (4c∗ )
Mp 10 3 20 10

1  2 2
(3Mp2 ) 5 V0 9V V 02
 
3(4c∗ ) 5 00
ns − 1 = 4 2 1 V + −
c 5 V 0 5 2(C1 + V 2 ) 5 V 4(C1 + V 2 )
 00 2
4V (C1 + V 2 ) − V V 0

3(n)
−
2(n + 4) 2(C1 + V 2 )
8−5n 5(n−1) 5n+2 5n−3
32GV 0 5
φ 2 (4c∗ ) 10 (C1 + V 2 ) 40
r = 3 23−5n 5n−3 5n−3 . (21)
π2c 10 3 20 Mp 10

For positive quadratic and quartic potential: The scalar spectral index and
tensor-to-scalar ratio in case of strong dissipative regime turns out to be

8−5n
5(n−1)
  2 2 2  5n−3
40
5 5n+2 λ ∗ φ4
2
32G (σ φ + λ∗ φ ) 3
φ 2 (4c∗ ) 10 C1 + σ 2φ + 4
r = 3 23−5n 5n−3 5n−3
π2b 10 3 20 Mp 10
1 2
(3Mp2 ) 5
  
3(4c∗ ) 5
ns − 1 = 4 2 λ ∗ φ4 2 5 2 2 1 (σ 2
c 5 (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) 5 2(C1 + ( σ 2φ +
4
))
2 2 4
9( σ 2φ + λ∗4φ )(σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2
2
(σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )
+ 3λ∗ φ2 ) + σ2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 − 2 2 4
( 2 + 4 ) 4(C1 + ( σ 2φ + λ∗4φ )2 )
σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2

3(n)
− 4(σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 )(C1 + ( + ))
2(n + 4) 2 4

11
 0.06

0.0104168
0.05
0.0104167
0.04
Σ=0.2 Σ=0.2
0.0104167
0.03

r
r

0.0104166
0.02
0.0104166

0.01
0.0104165

0.00
0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
ns ns

Figure 1: Plot of r versus ns for GCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for positive potential with n = 1.

1.2 ´ 10-6
3. ´ 10-15

2.5 ´ 10-15
1. ´ 10-6
Σ=0.2 Σ=0.2
2. ´ 10-15
r

8. ´ 10-7 1.5 ´ 10-15

1. ´ 10-15
6. ´ 10-7
5. ´ 10-16

0
0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
ns ns

Figure 2: Plot of r versus ns for GCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for positive potential with n = −1.

σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2 2 σ 2 φ2
− ( + )(σ φ + λ∗ φ3 ) (2(C1 + (
2 4 2
λ∗ φ4 2 −1
+ ) )) . (22)
4

By utilizing the value of negative quadratic and quartic potential and its
derivative in the expressions (21) of the scalar spectral index and tensor-to-
scalar ratio, we obtain

8−5n
5(n−1)
2 3 5 5n+2 σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2 5n−3
32G (−σ φ + λ∗ φ ) φ 2 (4c∗ ) 10 (C1 + (s − 2
+ 4
) ) 40
r = 3 23−5n 5n−3 5n−3
π2c 10 3 20 Mp 10
1 2
(3Mp2 ) 5
 
3(4c∗ ) 5
ns = 1 + 4 2 σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2 51
c 5 (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) 5 2(C1 + (s − 2
+ 4
))

12
 1.4 ´ 10-11 3.5 ´ 10-43

-11 3. ´ 10-43
1.2 ´ 10

2.5 ´ 10-43
Σ Σ=0.2
1. ´ 10-11
2. ´ 10-43

r
r

8. ´ 10-12 1.5 ´ 10-43

1. ´ 10-43
6. ´ 10-12
5. ´ 10-44
4. ´ 10-12
0
1.00002 1.00002 1.00002 1.00002 1.00002 1.00002 1.00002 1.00002 1.00000 1.00002 1.00004 1.00006 1.00008 1.00010
ns ns

Figure 3: Plot of r versus ns for GCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for positive potential with n = −2.

0.35 0.005

0.30
0.004
0.25
Σ=0.2 Σ=0.2
0.20 0.003
r

0.15
0.002

0.10
0.001
0.05

0.00 0.000
0.9992 0.9994 0.9996 0.9998 1.0000 1.00001 1.00002 1.00003 1.00004
ns ns

Figure 4: Plot of r versus ns for GCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for negative potential with n = 1.

4. ´ 10-28
1.2 ´ 10-8

1. ´ 10-8
3. ´ 10-28

8. ´ 10-9 Σ=0.2 Σ=
r

2. ´ 10-28
r

6. ´ 10-9

4. ´ 10-9
1. ´ 10-28
2. ´ 10-9

0 0
1.00000 1.00001 1.00002 1.00003 1.00004 1.00005 1.00006 1.00007 1.00000 1.00001 1.00002 1.00003 1.00004 1.00005 1.00006
ns ns

Figure 5: Plot of r versus ns for GCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for negative potential with n = −1.

13
 4. ´ 10-6
5. ´ 10-44

3. ´ 10-6 4. ´ 10-44
Σ= Σ=0.2
3. ´ 10-44
r

r
2. ´ 10-6

2. ´ 10-44

1. ´ 10-6
1. ´ 10-44

0 0
1.000 1.001 1.002 1.003 1.004 1.00000 1.00001 1.00001 1.00001 1.00002 1.00002 1.00003
ns ns

Figure 6: Plot of r versus ns for GCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for negative potential with n = −2.

2
(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) σ 2 φ2

2 2
× (−σ + 3λ∗ φ ) + σ 2 φ2 λ ∗ φ4
− 9(s −
(s − + ) 2
2 4
λ∗ φ4 σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2 −1
+ )(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 (4(C1 + (s − + ) ))
4 2 4
σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2

3(n) 2 2
− 4(−σ + 3λ∗ φ )(C1 + (s − + ))
2(n + 4) 2 4
σ 2 φ2 λ∗ φ4 2 σ 2 φ2
− (s − + )(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) (2(C1 + (s −
2  4 2
λ∗ φ4 2 −1
+ ) )) . (23)
4
We plot the graphs of r and ns for both weak and strong dissipative regimes
by assuming the positive quadratic and quartic potential for three differ-
ent values of n = 1, −1, −2, respectively as shown in Figures 1-3. The
other constant parameters appear in the model are assumed to be as follows:
Mp = 1, α = 10−13 , C1 = 10−45 , λ∗ = 10−3 , c = 0.3, C∗ = 70. The constraints
of inflationary parameters such as tensor-to-scalar ratio and spectral index
are displayed in the Table 1(a). It is found that the results are compatible
with WMAP9 [57] and Planck 2015 [58] which are given in Table 1.

Table 1: WMAP9 [57] and Planck 2015 [58] data for r and ns .

r (WMAP9) ns (WMAP9) r (Planck 2015) ns (Planck2015)

< 0.13 0.972 ± 0.013 < 0.11 0.968 ± 0.006

14
Table 1(a): GCG Weak and Strong Dissipative Regimes with Positive
Quadratic and Quartic Potential.

Sr.N o n r(W ) ns (W ) r(S) ns (S)

1 1 ≤ 0.0104168 0.98+0.01
−0.01 ≤ 0.06 0.90+0.06
−0.06
2 −1 ≤ 1.2 × 10−6 0.96+0.02
−0.02 ≤ 3.0 × 10−15 0.94+0.02
−0.02
3 −2 ≤ 1.4 × 10−14 1.00001+0.00001
−0.00001 ≤ 3.7 × 10−43 1.00011+0.00001
−0.00001

Figures 4-6 show the behavior of r and ns for negative quadratic and
quartic potential in weak and strong dissipative regimes. The parameters
appear in the model attained the values Mp = 1, s = 2, α = 10−5 , C1 =
10−45 , c = 0.3, C∗ = 70, λ∗ = 10−13 , c = 10−7 , G = 0.0398. The result for
negative quadratic and quartic potential are shown in the Table 1(b). The
values of tensor-to-scalar ratio and spectral index are consistence with ob-
servational data WMAP9 [57] and Planck 2015 [58].

Table 1(b): GCG Weak and Strong Dissipative Regime with Negative
Quadratic and Quartic Potential.

Sr.N o n r(W ) ns (W ) r(S) ns (S)

1 1 ≤ 0.38 1.0000+0.0001
−0.0001 ≤ 0.0055 1.0004+0.0001
−0.0001
2 −1 ≤ 0.000041 1.0031+0.0001
−0.0001 ≤ 4.0 × 10−28 1.000057+0.000001
−0.000001
3 −2 ≤ 4.5 × 10−6 1.0040+0.0001
0.0001 ≤ 5.2 × 10−44 1.00002+0.00001
−0.00001

4 Modified Chaplygin Gas

The EoS of MCG is given as [59]

ξ
pmcg = ζρmcg − , (24)
ραmcg

where pmcg and ρmcg represent the pressure and energy density of MCG,
respectively and 0 ≤ α ≤ 1, while ζ and ξ are positive constants. The

15
energy density ρmcg can be calculated by using energy conservation equation
as follows  1
 1+α
C4
ρmcg = C3 + 3(1+α)(1+ζ) , (25)
a
ξ
here C4 is an integration constant and C3 = 1+ζ . In view of MCG, Friedmann
equation takes the following form
 
2 1 (1+α)(1+ζ) 1
H = (C3 + ρφ ) 1+α + ργ . (26)
3Mp2

Under certain conditions as mentioned in GCG case, the above Friedmann

equation reduces to
1 (1+α)(1+ζ) 1 1 1
H2 = 2
(C3 + ρφ ) 1+α ∼ 2
(C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α . (27)
3Mp 3Mp

Next, we extract the inflationary parameters for both cases of dissipative

coefficient.

4.1 Weak Dissipative Regime

Here, the temperature remains the same as in case of GCG while slow roll
parameters turn out to be

MP2 (1 + ζ)V (1+α)(1+ζ)−1 V 02 Mp2


 = 2+α , η= 1 2V 00
2(C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α (C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α

02 (1+α)(1+ζ)−1 02

V ((1 + α)(1 + ζ) − 1) V V (1 + α)(1 + ζ)
+ − ,
V (C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) )

β = Mp (C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) )2(2nV 00 − nV 0 (n − 1)φ−1 − V 0
2

2+α
× (4 − n)(n − 1)φ−1 )((2(4 − n)(C3 + V (1+λ)(1+ζ) ) 1+α )−1
3n(1 + ζ)V 02 V (1+α)(1+ζ)−1

− 2+α .
2(4 − n)(C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α
Similarly, by using Eq.(8), the number of e-folds leads to
1
φ∗
(C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α
Z
1
N= 2 dφ. (28)
MP φend V0

16
With the help of Eq.(9)-(11), power spectrum, scalar spectral index and
tensor-to-scalar ratio in the form of potential given by
 6n−15
15−6n 
  21 4−n (1+α)(1+ζ) 2(4−n)(1+α) 4−n
3
81π Mp C3 + V c
PR =  n+2
,
4 15−6n
2(n+4) 0 6−3n n+2 (n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2)
3 2(4−n) C∗ V 4−n 6 4−n φ 2(4−n)

2  02
3Mp V ((1 + α)(1 + ζ) − 1)
ns − 1 = 1
2(C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α V
V (1+α)(1+ζ)−1 V 02 3
 
− (1 + ζ) + (1 + α)(1 + ζ)
(C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 4

00 3
+ 2V − (C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) )2(2nV 00 − nV 0 (n
2
− 1)φ−1 − V 0 (4 − n)(n − 1)φ−1 − 3n(1 + ζ)

(1+α)(1+ζ)−1 02 (1+α)(1+ζ)) −1
× V V ))(2(4 − n)(C3 + V )) , (29)
(n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2 7−4n 7−4n
6−3n n+2
32GV 0 4−n φ 2(4−n) 6 4−n C∗2(4−n) 3 2(4−n) Mp4−n
r = 3 3 7−4n . (30)
9c 4−n π 2 (C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) (4−n)(2+2α)

For positive quadratic and quartic potential, we get the following expressions
of r and ns
  6−3n
4−n n+2
(n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2 7−4n
2 3
32G σ φ + λ∗ φ φ 2(4−n) 6 4−n C∗2(4−n) 3 2(4−n)
r =   7−4n
(1+α)(1+ζ)  (4−n)(2+2α) ,
3 4n−7
3
9c 4−n π Mp
2
4−n
C3 + 21 σ 2 φ2 + λ∗ 4
4
φ

3Mp2

ns − 1 = 1 (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 {(1 + α)
2{C3 + ( 12 σ 2 φ2 + λ4∗ φ4 )(1+α)(1+ζ) } 1+α
 −1  (1+α)(1+ζ)−1
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 1 2 2 λ∗ 4
× (1 + ζ) − 1} σ φ + φ − σ φ φ
2 4 2 4
  (1+α)(1+ζ) −1
2 3 2 1 2 2 λ∗ 4
× (σ φ + λ∗ φ ) C3 + σ φ + φ
2 4
 
3 3
× (1 + ζ) + (1 + α)(1 + ζ) + 2(σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 ) −
4 2

17
   
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+ζ)
× 2 C3 + ( σ φ + φ ) 2n(σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 )
2 4
− n(σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )(n − 1)φ−1 − (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )(4 − n)(n − 1)φ−1
1 λ∗
− 3n(1 + ζ)( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+ζ)−1 (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2
2 4 
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+ζ) −1
× (2(4 − n)(C3 + ( σ φ + φ ) )) . (31)
2 4

For negative quadratic and quartic potential, the relations of r and ns lead
to
6−3n (n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2 7−4n
n+2
32G (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) 4−n φ 2(4−n) 6 4−n C∗2(4−n) 3 2(4−n)
r = 3 4n−7 7−4n
,
3
9c 4−n π 2 Mp4−n (C3 + (s − 21 σ 2 φ2 + λ4∗ φ4 )(1+α)(1+ζ) ) (4−n)(2+2α)
3Mp2

ns − 1 =   (1+α)(1+ζ)  1+α 1 − σ2φ
2 C3 + s − 12 σ 2 φ2 + λ4∗ φ4
2  −1
3 1 2 2 λ∗ 4
+ λ∗ φ {(1 + α)(1 + ζ) − 1} s − σ φ + φ
2 4
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+ζ)−1 2 3 2
(s − 2 σ φ + 4 φ ) (−σ φ + λ∗ φ )
− 1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+ζ)
C3 + (s − 2 σ φ + 4 φ )
 
3
× (1 + ζ) + (1 + α)(1 + ζ) + 2(−σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 )
4
  
3 1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+ζ)
− C3 + (s − σ φ + φ ) 2 2n(−σ 2
2 2 4
+ 3λ∗ φ2 ) − n(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )(n − 1)φ−1 − (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )

−1 1 λ∗
× (4 − n)(n − 1)φ − 3n(1 + ζ)(s − σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+ζ)−1
2 4
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+ζ) −1
× (2(4 − n)(C3 + (s − σ φ + φ ) ))
 2 4
× (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 . (32)

18
4.2 Strong Dissipative Regime
In this case, the slow roll parameters become

MP2 (1 + ζ)V (1+α)(1+ζ)−1 V 02 Mp2

 = 2+α , η= 1 (2V 00
2R(C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α
R(C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α

02 (1+α)(1+ζ)−1 02
V ((1 + α)(1 + ζ) − 1) V V (1 + α)(1 + ζ)
+ − ,
V (C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) )
!
n 2 4V 00 C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) − (1 + ζ)V 02 V (1+α)(1+ζ)−1


β = M .
R p 2+α
2(n + 4) (C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α

The number of e-folds turn out to be

Z φ∗ 1
1 (C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 1+α
N= 2 Rdφ
MP φend V0

The relations for perturbation, tensor-to-scalar ratio, spectral index can be

obtained by utilizing Eq.(9)-(11) as follows
9 9

2(1+α)(n+4)
 π  21 c n+4 C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ)
PR = 5(n−1)(n+4)−(n−1)(5n+2) 9 ,
4 (4C∗ )
5n+2
2(n+4) φ 2(n+4) Mp 3 V 0 6−3n
n+4 n+4
9
2(n+4)

n (n+4)(n−1)−n(n−1) 2 4
V 02
 n+4

3(4c∗ ) φ n+4 n+4 3 Mp n+4
ns − 1 = 4 2n 2 1
(1 + α)(1 + ζ)
2c n+4 V 0 n+4 (C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) (1+α)(n+4) V
V (1+α)(1+ζ)−1 V 02
  
3
× −1 − × (1 + ζ) + (1 + α)(1 + ζ)
(C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ) ) 4
  
00 3n 00 (1+α)(1+ζ) 02 (1+α)(1+ζ)−1
+ 2V − 4V (C3 + V ) − (1 + ζ)V V
2
 −1 
(1+α)(1+ζ)
× 2(n + 4)(C3 + V ) ,
5n+2 5(n−1) 8−5n 5n−3
V0

20(1+α)
32G(4C∗ ) 10 φ 2 5 C3 + V (1+α)(1+ζ)
r = 23−5n 3 5n−3 5n−3 .
c 10 π23 20 Mp 10

For positive quadratic and quartic potential, the tensor-to-scalar ratio and

19
scalar spectral index in terms of φ are given by
 5n−3
 20(1+α)
5(n−1) 2 2
5n+2 λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ)
32G(4C∗ ) 10 φ 2 C3 + ( σ 2φ + 4
)
r = 23−5n 3 5n−3 5n−3 5n−8
,
c 10 π23 20 Mp 10 (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) 5

−4 n (n+4)(n−1)−n(n−1) 2 4
3c n+4 (4c∗ ) n+4 φ n+4 3 n+4 Mpn+4
ns − 1 = 2n 4 2
2(σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) n+4 (C3 + ( 12 σ 2 φ2 + λ∗4φ )(1+α)(1+ζ) ) (1+α)(n+4)
 2
(σ φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 ((1 + α)(1 + ζ) − 1)
× 1 2 2 λ ∗ φ4
− (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2
2
σ φ + 4
(1+α)(1+ζ)−1 
1 2 2 λ∗ φ4 λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ)

1
× σ φ + ( σ 2 φ2 + )
2 4 2 4
−1  
3
+ C3 (1 + ζ) + (1 + α)(1 + ζ) + 2(σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 )
4
λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ)

3n 1
− 4(σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 )(C3 + ( σ 2 φ2 + ) )
2 2 4
1 λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ)−1
− (1 + ζ)(σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 ( σ 2 φ2 + )
2 4
1 2 2 λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ) −1

× (2(n + 4)(C3 + ( σ φ + ) )) . (33)
2 4

For negative quadratic and quartic potential, the tensor-to-scalar ratio and
scalar spectral index in terms of φ lead to

5n+2 5(n−1) 8−5n σ 2 φ2

r = 32G(4C∗ ) 10 φ 2 (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) 5 (C3 + (
2
λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ) 20(1+α)
5n−3 23−5n 3 5n−3 5n−3
+ ) ) (c 10 π 2 3 20 Mp 10 )−1 .
4
n (n+4)(n−1)−n(n−1) 2 4 4
ns − 1 = 3(4c∗ ) n+4 φ 3 n+4 Mpn+4 (2c n+4 (−σ 2 φ
n+4

2n 1 λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ) (1+α)(n+4)
2
+ λ∗ φ3 ) n+4 (C3 + (s − σ 2 φ2 + ) ) )−1
2 4
(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 ((1 + α)(1 + ζ) − 1)

1 2 2
× λ φ 4 − (s − σ φ
s − 1 σ 2 φ2 + ∗ 2 4
2
λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ)−1 1
+ ) (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 ((C3 + (s − σ 2 φ2
4 2

20
 λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ) −1 3
 
+ ) )) (1 + ζ) + (1 + α)(1 + ζ) + 2
4 4

2 2 3n
× (−σ + 3λ∗ φ ) − 4(−σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 )(C3 + (s
2
4
1 2 2 λ∗ φ (1+α)(1+ζ)
− σ φ + ) ) − (1 + ζ)(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2
2 4
1 λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ)−1
× (s − σ 2 φ2 + ) )
2 4
1 2 2 λ∗ φ4 (1+α)(1+ζ) −1

× (2(n + 4)(C3 + (s − σ φ + ) )) . (34)
2 4

For MCG model, the plots of r and ns for both weak/strong dissipative
regimes for both positive/negative quadratic and quartic potential for three
different values of n = 1, −1, −2, respectively are shown in Figures 7-12.
The observed constraints of scalar ratio and spectral index are displayed in
the Tables 2(a) and 2(b). It is found that the results are compatible with
WMAP9 [57] and Planck 2015 [58].

Table 2(a): MCG Weak and Strong Dissipative Regimes with Positive
Quadratic and Quartic Potential.

Sr.N o n r(W ) ns (W ) r(S) ns (S)

1 1 ≤ 0.005 1.00001+0.00001
−0.00001 ≤ 0.00025 1.0000+0.0001
−0.00001
2 −1 ≤ 0.05 1.17+0.001
−0.001 ≤ 0.00028 1.034+0.001
−0.001
3 −2 ≤ 0.000025 0.98+0.01
−0.01 ≤ 2.5 × 10−14 0.9+0.1
−0.1

Table 2(b): MCG Weak and Strong Dissipative Regime with Negative
Quadratic and Quartic Potential.

Sr.N o n r(W ) ns (W ) r(S) ns (S)

1 1 ≤ 0.5 1.0009+0.001
−0.001 ≤ 0.0052 1.00000+0.00001
−0.00001
2 −1 ≤ 0.00007 1.019+0.001
−0.001 ≤ 0.00028 1.034+0.001
−0.001
3 −2 ≤ 7.2 × 10−6 1.019+0.001
−0.001 ≤ 2.5 × 10−8 0.9+0.1
−0.1

21
 0.0006
0.00020
0.0005

0.0004 Σ=0.2 0.00015 Σ=0.2

r
r

0.0003
0.00010

0.0002
0.00005
0.0001

0.0000 0.00000
1.00001 1.00001 1.00001 1.00002 1.00000 1.00001 1.00001 1.00001
ns ns

Figure 7: Plot of r versus ns for MCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for positive potential with n = 1.

0.00025
0.05

0.00020
0.04
Σ=0.2 Σ=0.2

0.03 0.00015
r

0.02 0.00010

0.01 0.00005

0.00 0.00000
0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.000 1.005 1.010 1.015 1.020 1.025 1.030 1.035
ns ns

Figure 8: Plot of r versus ns for MCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for positive potential with n = −1.

0.000035
3. ´ 10-14

0.00003

0.000025 Σ=0.2 2.5 ´ 10-14 Σ=

r

0.00002
2. ´ 10-14
0.000015

0.00001 1.5 ´ 10-14

0.86 0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

ns ns

Figure 9: Plot of r versus ns for MCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for positive potential with n = −2.

22
 0.005

0.4
0.004

0.3 Σ=0.2
0.003
r

r
0.2
0.002

0.1 0.001

0.0 0.000
1.000 1.002 1.004 1.006 1.008 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00001 1.00001 1.00001 1.00001
ns ns

Figure 10: Plot of r versus ns for MCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for negative potential with n = 1.

0.00007

0.00025
0.00006

0.00005 0.00020

Σ=0.2 Σ=0.2
0.00004
0.00015
r
r

0.00003
0.00010
0.00002

0.00005
0.00001

0 0.00000
1.000 1.005 1.010 1.015 1.000 1.005 1.010 1.015 1.020 1.025 1.030 1.035
ns ns

Figure 11: Plot of r versus ns for MCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for negative potential with n = −1.

7. ´ 10-6
3.5 ´ 10-8
6. ´ 10-6
3. ´ 10-8
5. ´ 10-6
Σ=0.2 Σ=0.2
4. ´ 10-6 2.5 ´ 10-8
r

3. ´ 10-6
2. ´ 10-8
2. ´ 10-6
1.5 ´ 10-8
1. ´ 10-6

0 1. ´ 10-8
1.000 1.005 1.010 1.015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
ns ns

Figure 12: Plot of r versus ns for MCG model in weak (left panel) and strong
(right panel) dissipative regimes for negative potential with n = −2.

23
5 Generalized Cosmic Chaplygin Gas
This model is introduced by Gonzalez-Diaz [60] and its EoS is

ρgccg = −ρ−α C5 + (ρ1+α −δ

gccg − C5 ) . (35)
D
Here, C5 = 1+δ − 1, D takes positive or negative value, α is positive constant
and −l < δ < 0, l > 1. In the limiting case δ −→ 0, GCCG reduces to GCG.
For GCCG model, the energy density has the following form
 1
 1+α
C6 1
ρgccg = C5 + (1 + 3(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ . (36)
a
The corresponding Friedmann equation becomes
1  (1+α)(1+δ) 1 1

H2 = (C 5 + (1 + ρφ ) 1+δ )) 1+α + ρ
γ . (37)
3Mp2

Under certain assumptions, the above Friedmann equation takes the following
form
1
2 1  1
(1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ
 1+α
H ∼ C5 + (1 + V ) . (38)
3Mp2

5.1 Weak Dissipative Regime

The temperature remain same as in both above cases but the slow-roll pa-
rameters in this case take the form
−δ
Mp2 V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ V 02
 = 1 2+α ,
2(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) 1+α
MP2 00
η = 1 1 (2V
(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) 1+α
02
V ((1 + α)(1 + δ) − 1) δ(1 + α)V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 V 02
+ −
V (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) )
−δ
(1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ V 02
− 1 (1 + α)V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 ),
(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ )

1
β = Mp 2(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ )(2n V00 − n V0 (n − 1)φ−1
2

24
 −δ
− V 0 (4 − n)(n − 1)φ−1 ) − 3n V02 V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ
 −1 
1 2+α
(1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ
× 2(4 − n)(C5 + (1 + V ) ) 1+α . (39)

Taking into account Eq.(8), the relation for number of e-folds becomes
1 1
φ∗
(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) 1+α
Z
1
N= 2 dφ.
MP φend V0

For this model, the power spectrum, scalar spectral index and tensor-to-
scalar ratio in the form of potential can be found by using Eq.(9)-(11) as
follow
(15−6n)
 1  2(1+α)(4−n)

1+δ 3
 12 (1+α)(1+δ)

81π C5 + 1 + V c 4−n
PR = 15−6n n+2 ,(40)
4 15−6n
4−n 0 6−3n n+2
2(4−n)
(n−1)(4−n)−(n−1)(n+2)
3 2(4−n)Mp V 4−n 6 4−n C∗ φ 2(4−n)

3Mp2 02

V ((1 + α)(1 + δ) − 1)
ns − 1 = 1
2(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ )1+α V

1
− (3 2(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ )(2n V00 − n V0 (n − 1)φ−1
−δ
− V 0 (4 − n)(n − 1)φ−1 ) − 3n V02 V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ )
 −1
1
× 2(2)(4 − n)(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ
) ) + 2V 00 − δ(1 + α)
 −1  −δ
 1+δ
(1+α)(1+δ)−1 02
(1+α)(1+δ) (1+α)(1+δ)
× V V (1 + V ) − 1+V
 −1
1
02 (1+α)(1+δ)−1 (1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ
× V (1 + α)V C5 + (1 + V ) )

3
× ( + (1 + α)) , (41)
4
(n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2 7−4n 7−4n
6−3n n+2
32G V0 4−n φ 2(4−n) 6 4−n c∗2(4−n) 3 2(4−n) Mp4−n
r =  7−4n
 2(4−n)(1+α) . (42)
3 3 1
9c 4−n π 2 C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ

For positive quadratic and quartic potential, the relations of r and ns in

25
terms of scalar field can be expressed as
6−3n (n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2 7−4n 7−4n
n+2
32G (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) 4−n φ 2(4−n) 6 4−n c∗2(4−n) 3 2(4−n) Mp4−n
r = 7−4n (43),
1
   1+δ  2(4−n)(1+α)
3 3 (1+α)(1+δ)
9c 4−n π 2 C5 + 1 + 12 σ 2 φ2 + λ4∗ φ4

3Mp2
ns − 1 = 1
2(C5 + (1 + ( 12 σ 2 φ2 + λ4∗ φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ )1+α

1
× (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 ((1 + α)(1 + δ) − 1) (( σ 2 φ2
2
   
λ∗ 4 −1 1 λ∗
+ φ )) − 3 2 C5 + 1 + ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4
4 2 4
1 
 1+δ  
× )(1+α)(1+δ) 2n σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 − n(σ 2 φ

+ λ∗ φ3 )(n − 1)φ−1 − (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )(4 − n)(n


−1 1 λ∗
− 1)φ − 3n(σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ)−1
2 4
 −δ  
 1+δ
1 λ∗
× 1 + ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) / 2(2)(4 − n)
2 4
   1 
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ
× C5 + 1 + ( σ φ + φ )
2 4
1 λ∗
+ 2(σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 ) − δ(1 + α)( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ)−1
2 4 
1 λ ∗
2 3 2 2 2
× (σ φ + λ∗ φ ) (((1 + ( σ φ + φ ) 4 (1+α)(1+δ)
)−1
2 4
1 λ∗ −δ
− (1 + ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2
2 4 
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ)−1
× (1 + α)( σ φ + φ ) C5 + (1
2 4
−1 
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ 1 3
+ ( σ φ + φ) ) ) ( + (1 + α)) . (44)
2 4 4

For negative quadratic and quartic potential, the relations of r and ns in

26
terms of scalar field are given by
6−3n (n−1)(4−n)+(n−1)(n+2) n+2 7−4n 7−4n
n+2
32G (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) 4−n φ 2(4−n) 6 4−n c∗2(4−n) 3 2(4−n) Mp4−n
r = 7−4n (45)
,
1
   1+δ  2(4−n)(1+α)
3 3 (1+α)(1+δ)
9c 4−n π 2 C5 + 1 + s − 21 σ 2 φ2 + λ4∗ φ4

3Mp2
ns − 1 =   1 
 1+δ 1+α
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ)
2 C5 + 1 + (s − 2 σ φ + 4 φ )

(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 ((1 + α)(1 + δ) − 1)

   
× − 3 2 C5
(s − 12 σ 2 φ2 + λ4∗ φ4 )
  1 
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ
+ 1 + (s − σ φ + φ ) 2n(
2 4
− σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 ) − n(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )(n − 1)φ−1 − (

2 3 −1
− σ φ + λ∗ φ )(4 − n)(n − 1)φ − 3n(−σ 2 φ

3 2 1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ)−1 1
+ λ∗ φ ) (s − σ φ + φ ) 1 + (s −
2 4 2
−δ  
 1+δ 
λ∗
× σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) / 2(2)(4 − n) C5
4
  1 
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ
+ 1 + (s − σ φ + φ ) + 2(−σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 )
2 4
δ(1 + δ)(s − 21 σ 2 φ2 + λ4∗ φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ)−1 (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2
−  
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ)
1 + (s − 2 σ φ + 4 φ )
  −δ
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ
− 1 + (s − σ φ + φ ) (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 (1 + α)
2 4
 
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ)−1 1
× (s − σ φ + φ ) ( C5 + 1 + (s − σ 2 φ2
2 4 2
1 
 1+δ  
λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 3
+ φ) )−1 + (1 + α) . (46)
4 4

27
5.2 Strong Dissipative Regime
In this case, the slow roll parameters become
−δ
Mp2 V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ V 02
 = 1 2+α ,
2R(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) 1+α
MP2 00 V 02 ((1 + α)(1 + δ) − 1)
η = 1 1 (2V +
R(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) 1+δ V
−δ
δ(1 + α)V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 V 02 (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ V 02
− − 1
(1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) (C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ )
× (1 + α)V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 ),

1
β = n Mp 4V 00 (C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+ ) − ((1
2


−δ
(1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ 02 (1+α)(1+δ)−1
+ V ) V V ) (2R(n + 4)

1 2+α
× (C5 + 1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) 1+α )−1 . (47)

The expression of number of e-folds is given by

1 1
φ∗
(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) 1+α
Z
1
N= 2 Rdφ.
MP φend V0

The perturbation quantities turn out to be

9
1

 2(1+α)(n+4) 9
(1+α)(1+δ)
π  1
2
C5 + 1 + V 1+δ
c n+4
PR = 6−3n ,
4 9 9
n+4
5n+2 5(n−1)(n+4)−(n−1)(5n+2
)V 0 n+4
3 2(n+4) Mp (4C∗ ) 2(n+4) φ 2(n+4)

5(n−1) 5n−3
0 8−5n 5n+2
(1+α)(1+δ)


20(1+α)
32G V 5 φ 2 (4C∗ ) 10 C5 + 1 + V
r = 23−5n 3 5n−3 5n−3 ,
c 10 π 3
2 20 Mp 10

4 2 n (n+4)(n−1)−n(n−1)
n+4
3Mp 3 n+4 (4C∗ ) n+4 φ n+4
ns − 1 = 4 2n 1 2
0 n+4
2c V n+4 (C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) (n+4)(1+α)
 02((1+α)(1+δ)−1) 
V 1
× − 3n 4V 00 (C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ )
V

28
 
−δ
(1+α)(1+δ) 02 (1+α)(1+δ)−1
− (1 + V ) 1+δ V V (4(n + 4)(C5 + (1

1 δ(1 + α)V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 V 02

+ V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ))−1 + 2V 00 −
(1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) )
−δ
(1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ V 02 (1 + α)V (1+α)(1+δ)−1 3

− 1
(C5 + (1 + V (1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) 4

+ (1 + α) . (48)

For positive quadratic and quartic potential, the tensor-to-scalar ratio and
scalar spectral index in terms of φ can be expressed as follows
 
3 8−5n
5(n−1) 5n+2 1
2
r = 32G(σ φ + λ∗ φ ) 5 φ 2 (4C∗ ) 10 C5 + 1 + ( σ 2 φ2
2
5n−3
 20(1+α)
λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 23−5n 3 5n−3 5n−3
+ φ) (c 10 π 2 3 20 Mp 10 )−1 ,
4
4 2 n (n+4)(n−1)−n(n−1) 4
ns − 1 = 3Mpn+4 3 n+4 (4C∗ ) n+4 φ n+4 (2c n+4 (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3
2n 1 λ∗ 1 2
× ) n+4 (C5 + (1 + ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) (n+4)(1+α) )−1
 2 2 4
3 2
(σ φ + λ∗ φ ) ((1 + α)(1 + δ) − 1)
× 1 2 2 λ∗ 4
− 3n(4(σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 )
(2σ φ + 4 φ )
1 λ∗ 1 1
× (C5 + (1 + ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) − (1 + ( σ 2 φ2
2 4 2
λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ −δ 1 λ ∗
+ φ) ) (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ)−1 )
4 2 4
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 1+δ 1
× (4(n + 4)(C5 + (1 + ( σ φ + φ ) ) ))−1 + 2
2 4
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ)−1
δ( σ φ + 4 φ ) (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2
× (σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 ) − 2
(1 + α)−1 (1 + ( 21 σ 2 φ2 + λ4∗ φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) )
1 λ∗ −δ
− (1 + ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ (σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 (1 + α)
2 4
1 λ∗ 1 λ∗
× ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ)−1 ((C5 + (1 + ( σ 2 φ2 + φ4
2 4  2 4
1 3
× )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ))−1 ( + (1 + α)) . (49)
4

29
For negative quadratic and quartic potential, the tensor to scalar ratio and
scalar spectral index in terms of φ can be obtained as
8−5n 5(n−1) 5n+2 1
r = 32G(−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 ) 5 φ 2 (4C∗ ) 10 (C5 + (1 + (s − σ 2 φ2
2
λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ) 20(1+α)
5n−3 23−5n 3 5n−3 5n−3
+ φ) )) (c 10 π 2 3 20 Mp 10 )−1 ,
4
4 2 n (n+4)(n−1)−n(n−1) 4
ns − 1 = 3Mpn+4 3 n+4 (4C∗ ) n+4 φ n+4 (2c n+4 (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3
2n 1 λ∗ 1 2
× ) n+4 (C5 + (1 + (s − σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) (n+4)(1+α) )−1
2 4
2 3 2
 
(−σ φ + λ∗ φ ) ((1 + α)(1 + δ) − 1)
× 1 2 2 λ∗ 4
− 3n 4(−σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 )
(s − 2 σ φ + 4 φ )
1 λ∗ 1 1
× (C5 + (1 + (s − σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ) − (1 + (s −
2 4 2
λ ∗ −δ 1 λ∗
× σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 (s − σ 2 φ2 + φ4
4 2 4
1 λ∗
× )(1+α)(1+δ)−1 )(4(n + 4)(C5 + (1 + (s − σ 2 φ2 + φ4
2 4
1 1
× )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ ))−1 + 2(−σ 2 + 3λ∗ φ2 ) − δ(1 + α)(s − σ 2 φ2
2
λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ)−1 1 λ ∗
+ φ) (−σ 2 φ + λ∗ φ3 )2 ((1 + (s − σ 2 φ2 + φ4
4 2 4
1 λ∗ −δ
× )(1+α)(1+δ) ))−1 − (1 + (s − σ 2 φ2 + φ4 )(1+α)(1+δ) ) 1+δ (−σ 2
2 4
3 2 1 2 2 λ∗ 4 (1+α)(1+δ)−1
× φ + λ∗ φ ) (1 + α)(s − σ φ + φ ) ((C5 + (1 + (s
2 4
(1+α)(1+δ)  1+δ1  
1 2 2 λ∗ 4 −1 3
− σ φ + φ ) ( + (1 + α)) . (50)
2 4 4

For GCCG model, the plots of r and ns for weak/strong dissipative

regimes for both positive/negative quadratic and quartic potential for three
different values of n = 1, −1, −2, respectively are shown in Figures 13-18.
The observed constraints of scalar ratio and spectral index are displayed in
the Tables 3(a) and 3(b). It is found that the results are compatible with
WMAP9 [57] and Planck 2015 [58].
Table 3(a): GCCG Weak and Strong Dissipative Regime with Positive
Quadratic and Quartic Potential.

30
 0.00030
0.0006

0.0005 0.00025

Σ=0.2 0.00020 Σ=0.2

0.0004
r

r
0.0003 0.00015

0.0002 0.00010

0.0001 0.00005

0.0000 0.00000
1.00299 1.00299 1.00299 1.00300 1.00300 1.00300 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00001 1.00001 1.00001 1.00001 1.00001
ns ns

Figure 13: Plot of r versus ns for GCCG model in weak (left panel) and
strong (right panel) dissipative regimes for positive potential with n = 1.

0.00006
5. ´ 10-18

0.00005
4. ´ 10-18

0.00004
Σ=0.2 Σ=0.2
3. ´ 10-18
r

0.00003
r

2. ´ 10-18
0.00002

0.00001 1. ´ 10-18

0 0
1.000 1.002 1.004 1.006 1.008 0.999999 0.999999 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000
ns ns

Figure 14: Plot of r versus ns for GCCG model in weak (left panel) and
strong (right panel) dissipative regimes for positive potential with n = −1..

8. ´ 10-6 1.5 ´ 10-46

6. ´ 10-6
Σ= 1. ´ 10-46 Σ=0.2
r

-6
4. ´ 10

5. ´ 10-47
2. ´ 10-6

0 0
1.000 1.002 1.004 1.006 1.008 1.010 1.012 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
ns ns

Figure 15: Plot of r versus ns for GCCG model in weak (left panel) and
strong (right panel) dissipative regimes for positive potential with n = −2.

31
 0.00030

0.6 0.00025

Σ=0.2 0.00020 Σ=0.2

0.4
r

r
0.00015

0.00010
0.2

0.00005

0.0 0.00000
0.980 0.985 0.990 0.995 1.000 1.00000 1.00001 1.00001 1.00001
ns ns

Figure 16: Plot of r versus ns for GCCG model in weak (left panel) and
strong (right panel) dissipative regimes for negative potential with n = 1.

7. ´ 10-10
0.00002
6. ´ 10-10

5. ´ 10-10
0.000015 Σ=0.2
4. ´ 10-10
r
r

0.00001
3. ´ 10-10

2. ´ 10-10
5. ´ 10-6
1. ´ 10-10

0 0
1.000 1.005 1.010 1.015 1.020 1.025 1.030 1.035 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00001 1.00001
ns ns

Figure 17: Plot of r versus ns for GCCG model in weak (left panel) and
strong (right panel) dissipative regimes for negative potential with n = −1.

2.5 ´ 10-6
2.5 ´ 10-10

-6
2. ´ 10
2. ´ 10-10
Σ= Σ=0.2
1.5 ´ 10-6 1.5 ´ 10-10
r

1. ´ 10-6 1. ´ 10-10

5. ´ 10-7 5. ´ 10-11

0 0
1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 0.99995 0.99996 0.99997 0.99998 0.99999 1.00000
ns ns

Figure 18: Plot of r versus ns for GCCG model in weak (left panel) and
strong (right panel) dissipative regimes for negative potential with n = −2.

32
 Sr.N o n r(W ) ns (W ) r(S) ns (S)
1 1 ≤ 0.0007 1.0029+0.001
−0.001 ≤ 0.00032 1.0000+0.0001
−0.0001
2 −1 ≤ 0.000062 1.004+0.001
0.001 ≤ 3.5 × 10−18 1.000+0.001
−0.0001
3 −2 ≤ 8.2 × 10−6 1.011+0.001
−0.001 ≤ 1.5 × 10−46 0.9+0.1
−0.1

Table 3(b): GCCG Weak and Strong Dissipative Regime with Negative
Quadratic and Quartic Potential.

sr.N o n r(W ) ns (W ) r(S) ns (S)

1 1 ≤ 0.8 0.999+0.001
−0.001 ≤ 0.00033 1.0000+0.0001
−0.0001
2 −1 ≤ 0.000025 1.034+0.001
0.001 ≤ 7.2 × 10−10 1.0000+0.0001
−0.0001
3 −2 ≤ 2.7 × 10−6 1.06+0.001
−0.001 ≤ 2.7 × 10−10 1.0000+0.0001
−0.0001

6 Concluding Remarks
We have studied warm polynomial inflation (with positive/negative quadratic
and quartic potentials) by assuming generalized form of dissipative coefficient
n
(Γ = c φTn−1 ). In order to get the consistency of the results, we have consid-
ered different CG models like GCG, MCG, and GCCG. We have calculated
inflationary parameters for both weak and strong dissipative regimes such
as number of e-folds, scalar spectrum, scalar spectral index and tensor to
scalar ratio. For clear analysis of results, we have displayed the trajectories
between tensor-to-scalar ratio (r) and spectral index (ns ) in weak and strong
dissipative regimes for all CG models. The obtain results for all CG models
in the form of upper bounds of r and ns are summarized below:

GCG model:

• For positive quadratic and quartic potential, r ≤ 0.0104168, 1.2 ×

10−6 , 1.4×10−14 with respect to ns = 0.98+0.01 +0.02 +0.00001
−0.01 , 0.96−0.02 , 1.00001−0.00001 ,
respectively, for n = 1, −1, −2 in weak dissipative regime. However,
for strong dissipative regime, r ≤ 0.06, 3.0 × 10−15 , 3.7 × 10−43 for
ns = 0.90+0.06 +0.02 +0.00001
−0.06 , 0.94−0.02 , 1.00011−0.00001 respectively.

33
 • For negative quadratic and quartic potential, the results of tensor-to-
scalar ratio and scalar spectral index in weak dissipative regime are r ≤
0.38, 0.000041, 4.5×10−6 according to ns = 1.0000+0.0001 +0.0001
−0.0001 , 1.0031−0.0001 ,
1.0040+0.0001
−0.0001 respectively, and for strong dissipative regime r ≤ 0.0055,
4.0×10−28 , 5.2×10−44 for ns = 1.0004+0.0001 +0.000001 +0.00001
−0.0001 , 1.000057−0.000001 , 1.00002−0.00001
respectively.

MCG model:

• For positive quadratic and quartic potential, r ≤ 0.005, 0.05, 0.000025

according to ns = 1.00001+0.00001 +0.001 +0.01
−0.00001 , 1.17−0.001 , 0.98−0.011 , respectively.
Similarly, for strong dissipative regime, the results are r ≤ 0.00025,
0.00028, 2.5 × 10−14 for ns = 1.0000+0.0001 +0.001 +0.1
−0.0001 , 1.034−0.001 , 0.9−0.1 .

• The results with negative quadratic and quartic potential are r ≤ 0.5,
0.00007, 7.2×10−6 for ns = 1.0009+0.0001 +0.001 +0.001
−0.0001 , 1.019−0.001 , 1.019−0.001 and for
strong dissipative regime r ≤ 0.0052, 0.00028, 2.5 × 10−8 with respect
to ns = 1.00000+0.00001 +0.001 +0.1
−0.00001 , 1.034−0.001 , 0.9−0.1 .

GCCG model:

• For positive quadratic and quartic potential, r ≤ 0.0007, 0.000062,

8.2 × 10−6 with respect to ns = 1.0029+0.0001 +0.001 +0.001
−0.0001 , 1.004−0.001 , 1.011−0.001 .
In the similar way, for strong dissipative regime, the constraints are
r ≤ 0.00032, 3.5 × 10−18 , 1.5 × 10−46 for ns = 1.0000+0.0001 +0.001
−0.0001 , 1.000−0.001 ,
0.9+0.1
−0.1 .

• For negative quadratic and quartic potential, the results for tensor-to-
scalar ratio and scalar spectral index in weak dissipative regime are
r ≤ 0.8, 0.000025, 2.7 × 10−6 for ns = 0.999+0.001 +0.001 +0.01
−0.001 , 1.034−0.001 , 1.06−0.01 ,
and for strong dissipative regime, the results are r ≤ 0.00033, 7.2 ×
10−10 , 2.7 × 10−10 for ns = 1.0000+0.0001 +0.0001 +0.0001
−0.0001 , 1.0000−0.0001 , 1.0000−0.0001
respectively.

It is interesting to mentioned here that the above results of r and ns lie

within the constraints of WMAP9 [57] and Planck 2015 [58] (as mentioned
in Table 1).

Acknowledgments

34
 Abdul Jawad is thankful to the Higher Education Commission, Islam-
abad, Pakistan for its financial support under the grant No: 5412/Fed-
eral/NRPU/R&D/HEC/2016 of NATIONAL RESEARCH PROGRAMME
FOR UNIVERSITIES (NRPU). N.V. was supported by Comisión Nacional
de Ciencias y Tecnologı́a of Chile through FONDECYT Grant No 3150490.
Finally, the authors wish to thank the anonymous referee for her/his valu-
able comments, which have helped us to improve the presentation in our
manuscript.

References
[1] Ade, P. A. R., et al.: Astron. Astrophys. A20,(2016)594.

[2] Starobinsky, A.A.: Phys. Lett. B 91(1980); Guth, A.: Phys. Rev. D
23(1981)347.

[3] Gold, B. et al.: Astrophy. J. Suppl. 192(2011)15.

[4] Liddle, A.R. and Lyth, D.H.: Cosmological Inflation and Large-Scale
Structure, Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, U.K.(2000).

[5] Weinberg, S.: Cosmology, Oxford University Press, Oxford U.K. (2008).

[6] Dodelson, S.: Moderm Cosmology, Academic Press(2008).

[7] Bassett, B.A., Tsujikawa, S. and Wands, D.: Rev. Mod. Phys. 78 (2006)
537.

[8] Berera, A.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 3218.

[9] Berera, A. and Fang, L.Z.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 1912.

[10] Hall, L.M.H., Moss, I.G. and Berera, A.: Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 083525.

[11] Berera, A.: Nucl. Phys. B 585 (2000) 666.

[12] M. Bastero-Gil and A. Berera, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 24, 2207 (2009).

[13] Linde, A.D.: Phys. Lett. B 129(1983)177.

[14] A. Pich, arXiv:0705.4264 [hep-ph].

35
[15] P. W. Higgs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 508 (1964).

[16] F. Englert and R. Brout, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 321 (1964).

[17] D. H. Lyth, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1861 (1997).

[18] Herrera, R.: Phys. Rev. D 81(2010)123511.

[19] Del Campo, S. and Herrera, R.: Phys. Lett. B 660(2008)282.

[20] Setare, M.R. and Kamali, V.: JCAP 08(2012).

[21] Setare, M.R. and Kamali, V.: Phys. Rev. D 87(2013)083524.

[22] Bastero-Gil, M., Berera, A., Ramos, R.O., Rosa, J.G.: JCAP
1301(2013)016.

[23] M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, R.O. Ramos, J.G. Rosa: JCAP

1410(2014)10053.

[24] R. Herrera, M. Olivares and N. Videla: Eur. Phys. J. C 73(2013)2295.

[25] A. Jawad, S. Hussain, S. Rani and N. Videla, arXiv:1709.10430 [gr-qc].

[26] Panotopoulos, G. and Videla, N.: Eur. Phys. J. C 75(2015)525.

[27] Jawad, A., Ilyas, A. and Rani, S.: Int. J. Mod. Phys. D
26(2017)1750031; Astroparticle Phys. 81(2016)61; Jawad, A., Rani, S.
and Mohsaneen, S.: Eur. Phys. J. Plus 131(2016)234; Astrophys. Space
Sci. 361(2016)158; Jawad, A., Butt, S. and Rani, S.: Astrophys. Space
Sci. 361(2016)258; Eur. Phys. J. C 76(2016)274; Jawad, A., Rani, S.
and Ilyas, A.: Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 26 (2017) 1750144.

[28] Bamba, K. and Odintsov, S.D.: Eur. Phys. J. C 76(2016)18; Bamba,

K., Odintsov, S.D. and Tretyakov, P.V.: Eur. Phys. J. C 75(2015)344;
Sanchez, J. C. B., Bastero-Gil, M. Berera, A. and Dimopoulos, K.: Phys.
Rev. D 77(2008)123527; Herrera, R.: Phys. Rev. D 81(2010)123511;
Herrera, R. and San Martin, E.: Eur. Phys. J. C 71(2011)1701; Herrera,
R., Olivares, M. and Videla, N.: Eur. Phys. J. C 73(2013)2295; Phys.
Rev. D 88(2013)063535.

[29] Dimopoulos, K.: Phys. Lett. B 735(2014)75.

36
[30] Jawad, A., Ilyas, A. and Ahmad, S.: Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys.
14(2017)1750088; Jawad, A., Ilyas, A. and Rani, S.: Eur. Phys. J. C
77(2017)131.

[31] Kobayashi, T. and Seto, O.: Phys. Rev. D 89(2014)103524.

[32] Antonella cid, M., Del Campo, S., Herrera, R.: JCAP 0710(2007)005.

[33] Setare, M.R., Kamali, V.: JCAP 08(2012).

[34] Setare, M.R., Kamali, V.: Phys. Rev. D 87(2013)083524.

[35] Bastero-Gil, M., Berera, A., Ramos, R.O., Rosa, J.G.: JCAP
1301(2013)016.

[36] Y. Zhang, JCAP 0903, 023 (2009).

[37] M. Bastero-Gil, A. Berera, R. O. Ramos and J. G. Rosa, JCAP 1301,

016 (2013).

[38] A. Berera, M. Gleiser and R. O. Ramos, Phys. Rev. D 58 123508 (1998).

[39] Yokoyama, J. and Linde, A.: Phys. Rev D 60, 083509, (1999).

[40] Peebles, P. J. E. and Ratra, B. Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 559 (2003).

[41] Ratra, B. and Peebles, P. J. E.: Phys.Rev. D 37, 3406 (1988).

[42] Caldwell, R.R., Dave, R. and Steinhardt, P. J.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 80,
1582 (1998).

[43] Sami, M. and Padmanabhan, T.: Phys. Rev. D 67, 083509 (2003).

[44] Armendariz-Picon, C., Mukhanov, C. and Steinhardt, P. J.: Phys. Rev.

D 63, 103510 (2001) .

[45] Chiba, T.: Phys. Rev. D 66, 063514 (2002) .

[46] Scherrer, R. J.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 011301 (2004).

[47] Sen, A.: J. High Energy Phys. 04, 048 (2002) .

[48] Sen, A.: J. High Energy Phys. 07, 065 (2002) .

37
[49] Gibbons, G.W.: Phys. Lett. B 537, 1 (2002) .

[50] Caldwell, R. R.: Phys. Lett. B 545, 23 (2002) .

[51] Elizade, E., Nojiri, S. and Odintsov, S.: Phys. Rev. D 70, 043539 (2004).

[52] Cline, J. M., Jeon, S. and Moore, G.D.: Phys. Rev. D 70, 043543 (2004).

[53] Kamenshchik, A., Moschella, U. and Pasquier, V.: Phys. Lett. B 511,
265 (2001).

[54] O. Bertolami and V. Duvvuri, Phys. Lett. B 640, 121 (2006).

[55] T. Barreiro and A. A. Sen, Phys. Rev. D 70, 124013 (2004).

[56] Li, M.: Phys. Lett. B 603, 1 (2004).

[57] Hinshaw, G., et al.: Astrophys. J. Suppl. 208(2013)19.

[58] Ade, P. A. R., et al.: A&A 594(2016)A13.

[59] Benaoum, H.B.: hep-th/0205140.

[60] Gonzalez-Diaz, P.F.: Phys. Rev. D 68(2003)021303.

38