end{array}
\right] \,,$$ where $\mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS}(N)$ is the solution in Eq. . Even though the second term on the rhs of Eq.  still is a rapidly oscillating function, it cannot be discarded as simply as others due to the presence of $h^\prime$.

The last integral in Eq.  can be integrated iteratively by parts, and in such case it can be proved that if we retain the dominant term in the integrations we obtain[^12]: $$\label{eq:79}
  \mathbf{P}(N,\theta) \simeq \mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS}(N) + \frac{
    h^\prime}{2} \mathbf{N}_2(\theta) \,, \quad \mathbf{N}_2(\theta)
  = p \left[ 
\begin{array}{c}
{\rm Si}(\theta) - {\rm Si}(\theta_\star) \\
{\rm Ci}(\theta) - {\rm Ci}(\theta_\star)
\end{array}
\right] \,.$$ We can apply here the same kind of trick we used in Sec. \[sec:gener-solut-pert\], where we inferred that for the growing case: $\mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS} \sim h^\prime/2$, see Eq. . Thus, the second term on the rhs of Eq.  adds a negligible oscillating function to the general solution; in other words, we have just found that $\mathbf{P}(N,\theta) \simeq \mathbf{P}^{CLASS}(N) (1 +
\mathcal{O}(10^{-2}))$, which is the same level of accuracy attained for the background variables.

[^1]: This means that the evolution of the scalar field $\phi $ starts on the left branch of the parabolic potential , which is not a limitation as the system of equations is invariant under the change $\phi \to -\phi$. To start the evolution on the right branch, the signs of $y,y_1$ just need to be changed.

[^2]: Strictly speaking, there is no need to consider $y_1$ as a separate variable, nor to take Eq.  as an independent equation of motion. As shown in Eqs. , $y_1$ is just proportional to $H^{-1}$, and then only Eqs.  and  are enough to represent
end{array } 
 \right ] \,,$$ where $ \mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS}(N)$ is the solution in Eq.  . Even though the second term on the rhs of Eq.    still is a rapidly hover affair, it cannot be discarded as simply as others due to the bearing of $ h^\prime$. 

 The last integral in Eq.    can be integrated iteratively by parts, and in such font it can be proved that if we retain the dominant condition in the integrations we obtain[^12 ]: $ $ \label{eq:79 } 
   \mathbf{P}(N,\theta) \simeq \mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS}(N) + \frac { 
     h^\prime}{2 } \mathbf{N}_2(\theta) \, , \quad \mathbf{N}_2(\theta) 
   = p \left [ 
 \begin{array}{c } 
 { \rm Si}(\theta) - { \rm Si}(\theta_\star) \\ 
 { \rm Ci}(\theta) - { \rm Ci}(\theta_\star) 
 \end{array } 
 \right ] \,.$$ We can give here the same kind of trick we use in Sec.   \[sec: gener - solut - pert\ ], where we guess that for the growing subject: $ \mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS } \sim h^\prime/2 $, see Eq.  . therefore, the second term on the rhs of Eq.    adds a negligible oscillating routine to the general solution; in other bible, we have just recover that $ \mathbf{P}(N,\theta) \simeq \mathbf{P}^{CLASS}(N) (1 + 
 \mathcal{O}(10^{-2}))$, which is the same level of accuracy attained for the background variables. 

 [ ^1 ]: This mean that the evolution of the scalar field $ \phi $ starts on the left branch of the parabolic potential  , which is not a limitation as the system of equations is invariant under the change $ \phi \to -\phi$. To start the evolution on the right branch, the signs of $ y, y_1 $ just necessitate to be changed. 

 [ ^2 ]: Strictly speak, there be no need to consider $ y_1 $ as a freestanding variable, nor to take Eq.    as an independent equation of apparent motion. As shown in Eqs.  , $ y_1 $ is just proportional to $ H^{-1}$, and then only Eqs.    and    are enough to represent
end{wrray}
\right] \,,$$ where $\mathbf{K}^{\rm CLASS}(N)$ is the solutimn in Sq. . Even ghough the second term on thx rhw of Tz.  still is a rapiduy oscillwting fubctiib, it cannov be disgcrded ws snm'ly as others doe to the prasence of $h^\prike$.

Ghz last integral in Eq.  can be integraeed itetahively by partf, anc in alcm case it can be proved that if se retapn the dominant trrm in the integrations we obtwin[^12]: $$\label{eq:79}
  \mathbv{P}(N,\theta) \sineq \iqthbf{P}^{\rm CLARS}(N) + \frac{
    h^\prime}{2} \majhbf{N}_2(\theta) \,, \quad \mathbf{N}_2(\theta)
  = o \lefc[ 
\begin{arrai}{e}
{\em Dh}(\theta) - {\rm Wi}(\thena_\star) \\
{\rm Ci}(\tmvta) - {\rm Ci}(\thets_\star)
\end{array}
\rlght] \,.$$ We can apply here the seme kind of trick we used in Vee. \[sec:gener-solut-pert\], whwrw we hnfesred rhag fkr tge groainj case: $\mathgf{P}^{\rm CLASS} \sim h^\prime/2$, see Eq. . Uhuf, the second tsrm on tre rhs of Eq.  adds a negligible oscillatpng runction to the general solution; in other wotds, we havq just found that $\mathbf{P}(N,\theta) \simeq \mathbf{P}^{CLASV}(N) (1 +
\metfcao{O}(10^{-2}))$, dyifh is the same level of accuracy attained for fht bsckground varicbles.

[^1]: This means tjay the evolutiov of tks acalar field $\phi $ dtarts jn thw left brwnch of the parabolic potential , which is non a oimitation as the dystem of eduatoons os invariant under the ehange $\phi \to -\phi$. To start ghe evolution on thv richt branch, the signs of $y,y_1$ just neev to ye changdd.

[^2]: Sjrictly speaking, hhere is no need to conslder $i_1$ as a separate gariable, nor to take Eq.  as an iivependent equsthon of motijn. As shown in Eqs. , $y_1$ is just prokortional to $H^{-1}$, and then knly Eqv.  and  are egough to repradent
end{array} \right] \,,$$ where $\mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS}(N)$ is in . Even the second term still a rapidly oscillating it cannot be as simply as others due to presence of $h^\prime$. The last integral in Eq. can be integrated iteratively by and in such case it can be proved that if we retain the term the we $$\label{eq:79} \mathbf{P}(N,\theta) \simeq \mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS}(N) + \frac{ h^\prime}{2} \mathbf{N}_2(\theta) \,, \quad \mathbf{N}_2(\theta) = p \left[ \begin{array}{c} Si}(\theta) - {\rm Si}(\theta_\star) \\ {\rm Ci}(\theta) - Ci}(\theta_\star) \end{array} \right] \,.$$ can apply here the same of we used Sec. where inferred that for growing case: $\mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS} \sim h^\prime/2$, see Eq. . Thus, the second term on the rhs of adds a function to general in words, we have that $\mathbf{P}(N,\theta) \simeq \mathbf{P}^{CLASS}(N) (1 + the same level of accuracy attained for the variables. [^1]: means that the evolution of the field $\phi $ starts on the left branch the parabolic potential , which is not a limitation as the system of equations is the change $\phi \to To start the on right the of $y,y_1$ need to be changed. [^2]: Strictly speaking, there is no need consider $y_1$ as a separate variable, nor to take Eq. independent of motion. As in Eqs. , $y_1$ just to $H^{-1}$, and then and enough
end{array}
\right] \,,$$ where $\mathbf{P}^{\Rm CLASS}(N)$ is The soLutIon In eq. . EvEn thOugh the second tERm on The rhs of Eq.  still is a rapiDly osCiLLatiNG fUnctiOn, it canNOt BE DisCaRdEd aS sIMpLy as oTheRs due to The presencE of $H^\pRime$.

The last iNTeGral in Eq.  caN be Integrated itEraTively By ParTS, and iN suCh casE it can BE proveD that if we ReTAin the DOminant TERm In thE integrations we obTAiN[^12]: $$\Label{eq:79}
  \mathbf{P}(n,\theta) \SiMEq \MAThbF{P}^{\rM CLASS}(N) + \fraC{
    h^\Prime}{2} \MAthbf{N}_2(\tHEtA) \,, \QUAd \mAThbf{N}_2(\theta)
  = p \leFt[ 
\begin{arraY}{C}
{\rm si}(\thetA) - {\rM Si}(\THeta_\stAr) \\
{\rm CI}(\tHEta) - {\Rm Ci}(\theta_\stAr)
\enD{array}
\rigHt] \,.$$ We caN Apply heRE the samE kind oF trIck We usED iN SEc. \[sEc:GEneR-SoLut-PErt\], Where we iNfErRed thAt foR THE GrowIng Case: $\MathbF{P}^{\rm CLASS} \sim h^\PriMe/2$, seE eq. . THus, thE secoNd teRm On the Rhs of EQ.  adds A nEgligible oscillAtinG function To tHe GenErAl solUTion; in OthEr wOrds, we hAve just FOunD tHAT $\MaThbf{P}(N,\theta) \simeq \maThBF{p}^{ClASS}(N) (1 +
\matHcal{O}(10^{-2}))$, wHIcH iS The same lEvEl oF accURAcy atTainED fOr the bacKgrounD VaRiAbles.

[^1]: ThIs Means tHaT thE evOlutiON of tHe scalAr field $\pHi $ staRTs on the left braNCh of the paraboLIc POTeNTial , WhiCh is not a limItatIOn as The sYStEm oF EquatIons iS iNVaRIant under the change $\pHi \To -\phi$. TO starT the evolution On the right BRANch, the siGns oF $Y,y_1$ JUst need to be chaNged.

[^2]: STrictly speAKing, therE is no Need to coNsider $y_1$ as A SEparate vAriAblE, noR to TAKe eq.  as an indepenDENt eqUaTion of mOtiOn. As shoWn iN EqS. , $y_1$ iS juSt ProportioNal to $H^{-1}$, anD tHeN oNlY EqS.  and  aRE enough tO rEprEsEnt
end{array}
\right] \,,$$ w here $\mat hbf{P }^{ \rm  C LASS }(N) $ is the solut i on i n Eq. . Even though th e sec on d  ter m  o n the  rhs of Eq .  st il lisar ap idlyosc illatin g function , i tcannot be di s ca rded as si mpl y as othersdue  to th epre s enceof$h^\p rime$. 
The l ast integ ra l  in Eq .   can b e in tegr ated iterativelyb yp arts, and in s uch ca se it c anbeproved tha tif we retaint he d o min a nt term in th e integrati o nswe obt ai n[^ 1 2]: $$ \labe l{ e q:7 9}
  \mathb f{P} (N,\theta ) \sim e q \math b f{P}^{\ rm CLA SS} (N)  + \ f ra c{ 
  h ^\p r im e}{ 2 } \ mathbf{N }_ 2( \thet a) \ , , \ quad  \m athb f{N}_ 2(\theta)
  =  p\lef t [ \begi n{arr ay}{ c} 
{\rm  Si}(\ theta )- {\rm Si}(\the ta_\ star) \\{\r mCi} (\ theta )  - {\r m C i}( \theta_ \star)\ end {a r r a y} 
\right] \,.$$ Weca n ap ply here  the s a me  k i nd of tr ic k w e us e d  in S ec.\ [s ec:gener -solut - pe rt \], whe re  we in fe rre d t hat f o r th e grow ing case : $\m a thbf{P}^{\rm C L ASS} \sim h^\ p ri m e /2 $ , se e E q. . Thus,thes econ d te r mont he rh s ofEq .  a dds a negligible os ci llatin g fun ction to thegeneral so l u t ion; inothe r  w o rds, we have j ust f ound that$ \mathbf{ P}(N, \theta)\simeq \m a t hbf{P}^{ CLA SS} (N)  (1 + 
\ mathcal{O}(10 ^ { -2}) )$ , which  is  the sa melev elofac curacy at tained f or  t he  b ack groun d  variabl es .
[^ 1]:  This meansthattheev ol u tio n of th e  s c a larfi el d $\ phi  $  star ts o n  th e leftbranch of  th e  par ab ol ic pote ntial , which  i s not a li mi tat ion as t he syste m of equations is invar i ant und erthe c hang e $\phi \ to-\phi$ . T o  start  the e volut io n o n the r i g ht  br an ch, the si g n s o f $y, y_ 1$ j ust nee d to be changed.
[ ^2] : Strictly sp eak ing, t he rei sn o n ee d  to c onsider $y_1$ a s a separa te va riable, no r  to  t ake Eq.   as an  inde p endentequationof motion .As s h o wnin Eqs. ,$y_1$ is  just pro p ortio n al  to $ H^{ -1}$,an d t hen o nly Eq s . and are en ou gh torepre se nt
end{array}
\right] \,,$$_where $\mathbf{P}^{\rm_CLASS}(N)$ is the solution_in Eq. ._Even_though the_second_term on the_rhs of Eq. _still is a rapidly_oscillating function, it_cannot_be discarded as simply as others due to the presence of $h^\prime$.

The last integral_in_Eq.  can_be_integrated_iteratively by parts, and in_such case it can be_proved that_if we retain the dominant term in the_integrations_we obtain[^12]: $$\label{eq:79}
_ \mathbf{P}(N,\theta) \simeq \mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS}(N) + \frac{
  _ h^\prime}{2} \mathbf{N}_2(\theta) \,, \quad \mathbf{N}_2(\theta)
_ = p_\left[_
\begin{array}{c}
{\rm_Si}(\theta) - {\rm Si}(\theta_\star)_\\
{\rm Ci}(\theta) - {\rm Ci}(\theta_\star)
\end{array}
\right] \,.$$_We can apply here the same_kind of trick we used in Sec. \[sec:gener-solut-pert\],_where we inferred that for the_growing case: $\mathbf{P}^{\rm CLASS} \sim_h^\prime/2$, see_Eq. . Thus, the second term_on the rhs_of Eq. _adds a negligible_oscillating function to the general solution;_in other words,_we have just found that $\mathbf{P}(N,\theta)_\simeq_\mathbf{P}^{CLASS}(N) (1 +
\mathcal{O}(10^{-2}))$,_which_is_the same_level of accuracy_attained_for the_background_variables.

[^1]: This means that the evolution_of_the scalar field $\phi $ starts on_the left branch of_the_parabolic potential , which is_not a limitation as the_system of equations is invariant under_the change_$\phi \to_-\phi$. To start the evolution on the right branch, the signs_of $y,y_1$ just need to be_changed.

[^2]: Strictly speaking, there_is no_need_to consider $y_1$_as_a separate_variable, nor to take Eq.  as an_independent equation_of motion. As shown in Eqs. ,_$y_1$ is just proportional_to_$H^{-1}$, and then only Eqs.  and _are enough to represent