Planck 2018 results
Open Access

Table 5.

Bayesian comparison for a selection of slow-roll inflationary models with wint fixed (see text for more details).

Inflationary model Potential V(ϕ) Parameter range Δχ2 lnB
R + R2/(6M2) ... ...
Power-law potential ... 4.0 −4.6
Power-law potential ... 6.8 −3.9
Power-law potential ... 12.0 −6.4
Power-law potential ... 21.6 −11.5
Power-law potential λMPlϕ3 ... 44.7 −13.2
Power-law potential λϕ4 ... 75.3 −56.0
Non-minimal coupling λ4ϕ4 + ξϕ2R/2 −4 <  log10ξ <  4 0.4 −2.4
Natural inflation Λ4[1+cos(ϕ/f)] 0.3 <  log10(f/MPl) < 2.5 9.9 −6.6
Hilltop quadratic model 0.3 <  log10(μ2/MPl) < 4.85 1.3 −2.0
Hilltop quartic model −2 <  log10(μ4/MPl) < 2 −0.3 −1.4
D-brane inflation (p = 2) −6 <  log10(μD 2/MPl) < 0.3 −2.0 0.6
D-brane inflation (p = 4) −6 <  log10(μD 4/MPl) < 0.3 −3.5 −0.4
Potential with exponential tails Λ4[1−exp(−qϕ/MPl)+…] −3 <  log10q <  3 −0.4 −1.0
Spontaneously broken SUSY Λ4[1+αhlog(ϕ/MPl)+…] −2.5 <  log10αh <  1 6.7 −6.8
E-model (n = 1) 0.8 −0.3
E-model (n = 2) 0.8 −1.6
T-model (m = 1) −0.1 −1.2
T-model (m = 2) 0.8 −0.6

Notes. We quote 0.3 as the error on the Bayes factor. Models are strongly disfavoured when lnB <  −5.

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.