HIGGS INFLATION AROUND THE SYMMETRIC POINT

D. Berkimbayev; Y. Aldabergenov

doi:10.31489/2026N2/148-155

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31489/2026N2/148-155

Keywords:

cosmology, inflation, Higgs field, spontaneous symmetry breaking

Abstract

A novel generalized Higgs inflation scenario is studied, where inflation takes place near the symmetric point of the “Mexican hat” potential, as opposed to the standard Higgs inflation which takes place at large field values away from the symmetric point. When minimally coupled to gravity, inflation near the symmetric point leads to large tensor-to-scalar ratio which is ruled out by CMB observations, while requiring super-Planckian Higgs VEV which also acts as the axion decay constant (super-Planckian values of the decay constant are theoretically disfavored, for example by the swampland conjectures). It is shown that both of the aforementioned problems can be resolved by considering non-minimal coupling of the Higgs field to the scalar curvature of spacetime. This requires sufficiently large non-minimal coupling parameter, and produces similar results for the scalar spectral index and tensor-to-scalar ratio to the standard Higgs inflation, and the Starobinsky model. The Higgs field under consideration can in principle be identified with the Standard Model Higgs scalar, in which case an extremely large non-minimal coupling is required (in order to reproduce CMB-aligned predictions), which can also be theoretically problematic. A more likely scenario is a hidden sector Higgs-like field, such as the Peccei–Quinn field, where a smaller non-minimal coupling is acceptable. The proposed model offers an alternative to the simplest single-field models of inflation, especially of Higgs and Peccei-Quinn type, while fitting the CMB observations of primordial power spectra. An advantage of such models in the vast landscape of inflationary theories is simplicity: no ad hoc scalar fields are assumed to exist purely to explain inflation, since both Higgs and Peccei-Quinn fields are motivated by particle physics considerations.

References

1 Planck Collaboration (2020). Planck 2018 Results. X. Constraints on Inflation. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 641, A10, https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201833887

2 Bezrukov, F.L., Shaposhnikov, M. (2008). The Standard Model Higgs Boson as the Inflaton. Physics Letters. B. , 659, 703-706, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2007.11.072 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2007.11.072

3 Rubio, J. (2019). Higgs inflation. Front. Astron. Space Sci., 5, 50.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fspas.2018.00050 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fspas.2018.00050

4 Cheong, D.Y., Lee, S.M., Park, S.C. (2021). Progress in Higgs inflation. J. Korean Phys. Soc., 78, 897-906, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40042-021-00086-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40042-021-00086-2

5 Barvinsky, A.O., Kamenshchik, A.Y., Starobinsky, A.A. (2008). Inflation Scenario via the Standard Model Higgs Boson and LHC. JCAP, 11, 021, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2008/11/021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2008/11/021

6 De Simone, A., Hertzberg, M.P., Wilczek, F. (2009), Running Inflation in the Standard Model. Physics Letters B., 678, 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2009.05.054 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2009.05.054

7 Burgess, C.P., Lee, H.M., Trott, M. (2009). Power-counting and the Validity of the Classical Approximation During Inflation. JHEP, 09, 103, 1-23, https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2009/09/103 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2009/09/103

8 Barbon, J.L.F., Espinosa J.R. (2009). On the Naturalness of Higgs Inflation. Phys. Rev. D, 79, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.79.081302 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.79.081302

9 Lerner, R.N., McDonald, J. (2010). Higgs Inflation and Naturalness. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys., 04, 015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2010/04/015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2010/04/015

10 Burgess, C.P., Lee, H.M., Trott, M. (2010). Comment on Higgs Inflation and Naturalness. J. High Energy Phys., 2010, https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2010)007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2010)007

11 Bezrukov, F., Magnin, A., Shaposhnikov, M., Sibiryakov, S. (2011). Higgs inflation: consistency and generalisations. J. High Energy Phys., 01, 016. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2011)016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2011)016

12 Giudice, G.F., Lee, H.M. (2011). Unitarizing Higgs Inflation. Phys. Lett. B, 694, 294–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2010.10.141 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2010.10.035

13 Hamada, Y., Kawana, H., Oda, K.-y., Park, S.C. (2015). Higgs inflation from Standard Model criticality. Phys. Rev. D, 91, 053008. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.053008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.053008

14 Escriva, A., Germani, C. (2017). Beyond dimensional analysis: Higgs and new Higgs inflations do not violate unitarity. Phys. Rev. D, 95, 123526. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.123526 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.123526

15 Ito, A., Khater, W., Rasanen, S. (2022). Tree-level unitarity in Higgs inflation in the metric and the Palatini formulation, JHEP, 06, 164. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06%282022%29164 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2022)164

16 Karananas, G.K., Shaposhnikov, M., Zell, S. (2022). Field redefinitions, perturbative unitarity and Higgs inflation, JHEP, 06, 132. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06%282022%29132 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2022)132

17 Boubekeur, L., Lyth, D.H. (2005). Hilltop Inflation, JCAP, 07, 010.

https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2005/07/010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2005/07/010

18 Beltran, M., Garcıa-Bellido, J., Lesgourgues, J. (2007). Isocurvature Bounds on Axions Revisited. Phys. Rev. D, 103507. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.75.103507 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.75.103507

19 Planck Collaboration, Akrami, Y. et al. (2020). Planck 2018 results. X. Constraints on inflation, Astron. Astrophys, 641, A10, https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201833887 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202039265

20 BICEP, Keck Collaboration, Ade, P. A. R. et al. (2021). Improved Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves using Planck, WMAP, and BICEP/Keck Observations through the 2018 Observing Season. Phys. Rev. Lett., 127, 1-22, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.151301 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.151301

21 Banks, T., Dine, M., Fox, P.J., Gorbatov, E. (2003). On the possibility of large axion decay constants. JCAP, 1-17, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2003/06/001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2003/06/001

22 Bachlechner, T.C., Long, C., McAllister, L. (2015). Planckian Axions in String Theory. JHEP, 1-36, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2003/06/001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2015)042

23 Ooguri ,H., Vafa, C. (2007). On the Geometry of the String Landscape and the Swampland. Nucl. Phys. B, 766, 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.10.033 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.10.033

24 Kawasaki, M., Sonoda, E., Yanagida, T.T. (2018). Cosmologically allowed regions for the axion decay constant Fa. Phys. Lett. B, 782, 181–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018.05.014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018.05.014

25 Aldabergenov, Y., Berkimbaev, D. (2025). Gauss–Bonnet-Induced Symmetry Breaking/Restoration During Inflation. Universe, 1-9, https://doi.org/10.3390/universe11030098 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/universe11030098

26 Addazi, A., Aldabergenov, Y., Berkimbaev, D., Cai, Y. (2025). (Lovelock^2) inflation: explaining the ACT data and equivalence to Higgs–Gauss–Bonnet inflation. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2512.21167

27 Ooguri, H., Palti, E., Shiu, G., Vafa, C. (2019). Distance and de Sitter Conjectures on the Swampland. Phys. Lett. B, 788, 180–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018.11.018 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018.11.018

28 Lewis, A. (2025). GetDist: a Python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples. JCAP, 08, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/025

29 Hertzberg, M.P. (2010). On Inflation with Non-minimal Coupling. JHEP, 11, https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2010)023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2010)023

30 Antoniadis, I., Guillen, A., Tamvakis, K. (2021). Ultraviolet behaviour of Higgs inflation models. JHEP, 08, https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2010)023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2021)018

31 Atacama Cosmology Telescope Collaboration. (2025). The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 constraints on extended cosmological models. JCAP, 11, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2025/11/063 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2025/11/063

32 Lynker, M., Schimmrigk, R. (2025). ACT Implications for Hilltop Inflation. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.15076

33 Hell, A., Lust, D. (2025). Aspects of non-minimally coupled curvature with power laws. JHEP, 12, https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2025)091 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2025)091

34 Pallis, C. (2026). Updating GUT-scale pole Higgs inflation after ACT DR6. Phys.Rev.D, 113, 015033, https://doi.org/10.1103/h1p2-c333 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/h1p2-c333

35 Pallis, C. (2026). Induced-Gravity Palatini-Like Higgs Inflation in Supergravity Confronts ACT DR6. Astronomy, 5, https://doi.org/10.3390/astronomy5020009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/astronomy5020009

36 Zahoor, M., Khan, S., Bhat, I.A. (2025). Reconciling Fractional Power Potential and EGB Gravity in the light of ACT. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.18684 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jheap.2025.100458

37 Zhu, Y., Gao, Q., Gong, Y., Yi, Z. (2025). Inflationary Models with Gauss-Bonnet Coupling in Light of ACT Observations. Eur. Phys. J. C., 85, 1227, https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14969-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14969-2

HIGGS INFLATION AROUND THE SYMMETRIC POINT