 In particular, one needs also to take into account the last term in the expansion in [(\[Q\_expl\])]{}. But then $Z_{h} = Z_{\chi} = Z_\phi =1/Z_\xi$ is no longer a consistent solution; it would give the inconsistent relation = (Q + Q\^2 +...) + Z\_\^[3/2]{} ( Q\^2+ Q\^3 +...). Thus for GB scattering one cannot really define $Z_{\chi}$, $Z_{h}$ in terms of the elementary wavefunctions [(\[Zelement\])]{}. Fortunately, this is also not necessary, because we can simply use [(\[Zcompo\])]{}.

Approximations used {#s:checks}
-------------------

Before diving into the calculation we first list here the approximations made.

1.  [We have dropped the time-dependence of the background field: $\dot \phi_0 \to 0$]{}

2.  [We have neglected FLRW corrections and the backreaction of gravity]{}

3.  [We have evaluated the field metric on the classical background.]{}

1\. In [@mp] we calculated the effective action in the SM regime, taking into account the rolling of the classical background field $\dot \phi_0$. Generalizing standard techniques to calculate the effective action to the time-dependent situation, we found the radiative corrections to both the classical potential and the kinetic terms. This allowed us to extract both the $\delta_\lambda$ and $\delta_\phi$ counterterms from the effective action. We retrieved the standard results. The time-dependence does not affect the form of the counterterms. Had we done the calculation in a time-independent way, by neglecting $\dot \phi_0$, we would have found the same $\delta_\lambda$ counterterm.

In the large field regime the time-dependence enters also the kinetic terms, which are non-minimal, and it may not be obvious that we can neglect these effects. However, the large field regime is the inflationary regime, and all time-dependent corrections are slow roll suppressed. Working at leading order in the expansion parameter, as we do, they can be neglected.

2\. In [@damien; @GMP] we calculated the effective action in the SM regime, in a FLRW background. We showed that when working in the [*Einstein frame*]{}, the backreaction from gravity can be neglected. The reason is that the corrections are of the
In particular, one needs also to take into explanation the final term in the expansion in [ (\[Q\_expl\ ]) ] { }. But then $ Z_{h } = Z_{\chi } = Z_\phi = 1 / Z_\xi$ is no longer a consistent solution; it would give the discrepant relation = (Q + Q\^2 + ...) + Z\_\^[3/2 ] { } (Q\^2 + Q\^3 + ...). Thus for GB scattering one cannot truly define $ Z_{\chi}$, $ Z_{h}$ in terms of the elementary wavefunctions [ (\[Zelement\ ]) ] { }. Fortunately, this is besides not necessary, because we can plainly use [ (\[Zcompo\ ]) ] { }. 

 Approximations use { # s: checks } 
 ------------------- 

 Before dive into the calculation we first list here the approximations made. 

 1.   [ We have dropped the time - dependence of the setting field: $ \dot \phi_0 \to 0 $ ] { } 

 2.   [ We have neglected FLRW corrections and the backreaction of graveness ] { } 

 3.   [ We have evaluated the field measured on the classical backdrop. ] { } 

 1\. In [ @mp ] we calculated the effective natural process in the SM regime, taking into account the wheeling of the classical background field $ \dot \phi_0$. Generalizing standard techniques to count the effective action to the time - dependent situation, we found the radiative corrections to both the classical potential and the kinetic terms. This allow us to extract both the $ \delta_\lambda$ and $ \delta_\phi$ counterterms from the effective action. We remember the standard result. The time - dependence does not affect the mannequin of the counterterms. Had we done the calculation in a time - independent way, by neglect $ \dot \phi_0 $, we would have found the same $ \delta_\lambda$ counterterm. 

 In the large field regime the time - addiction enters also the kinetic terms, which are non - minimal, and it may not be obvious that we can neglect these effects. However, the large field government is the inflationary regime, and all time - dependent corrections are slow paradiddle suppressed. Working at leading decree in the expansion parameter, as we do, they can be neglected. 

 2\. In [ @damien; @GMP ] we calculated the effective natural process in the SM regime, in a FLRW background. We read that when working in the [ * Einstein human body * ] { }, the backreaction from gravity can be neglect. The reason is that the correction are of the
 In particular, one needs alro to take into accounv the lzst term in the expansion in [(\[Q\_expl\])]{}. Bnt tyen $Z_{y} = Z_{\chi} = Z_\phi =1/Z_\xi$ is nu longer w consisrent wolution; iv would nnve tgc incmisistent relatipn = (Q + Q\^2 +...) + Z\_\^[3/2]{} ( Q\^2+ Q\^3 +...). Thus xof YB scattering one cannot really defige $Z_{\chi}$, $Z_{j}$ in terms of jhe ekqmenfary wavefunctions [(\[Zelement\])]{}. Fortunztely, tiis is also not necessary, because we can dimppy use [(\[Zcompo\])]{}.

Approdimations uwed {#f:xhecks}
-------------------

Before diving inuo the calcumation we first list here the aoproxnmations maee.

1.  [Wf have droppxd the time-dependekbe of tve backbround field: $\dpt \'hi_0 \ro 0$]{}

2.  [We have neglectev FLRW corrections agd the bawkxeaction of gravity]{}

3.  [Qe have evanuatde tfe rixld metrif oi the classjcal backgriund.]{}

1\. In [@mp] we calcukaevc the effectjve aceijn in the SM regime, taking into account ths rolling of the classixal background field $\fot \phi_0$. Gqneralizing standard techniques to calculate the affecvixe cgbion ro the time-dependent situation, we found the radyztovv corrections to noth the classical pltrgtial and the kinetnd ferms. This allowed us to gxtracr both tht $\delya_\lambda$ and $\delta_\phi$ countwrterms from rhe effective actiln. We retrizved tne stsndard results. The time-bependsnce does nlt affect ghe form of the zouktesterms. Had we done the calsulation mn a cime-indeoendgnt way, by negleching $\dot \phi_0$, we would hage foond tha same $\delha_\lambda$ counterterm.

In the largx field regimg tve nime-depenbence cnters also the kinetic terms, which cre nov-minimal, ahd it mey not be obdious that we fan neglect vhese effqcts. Howwver, thd large field rrgime is nht inflatiobary regime, and alk tkje-dependent corxtctuons are slow rpll su[pgesxeq. Working at neadkng prder in the expcnrion parameter, as we do, dhey can be neglected.

2\. On [@damien; @TMP] we cwlculated the effective action ln thx SM rxgime, on w FLRW background. We showed thzt when wlrklng in the [*Eigsteln ftame*]{}, the baekreaction from gravity can be neglected. The reason is thar the corrections ate pf the
In particular, one needs also to take the term in expansion in [(\[Q\_expl\])]{}. = =1/Z_\xi$ is no a consistent solution; would give the inconsistent relation = + Q\^2 +...) + Z\_\^[3/2]{} ( Q\^2+ Q\^3 +...). Thus for GB scattering cannot really define $Z_{\chi}$, $Z_{h}$ in terms of the elementary wavefunctions [(\[Zelement\])]{}. Fortunately, is not because can simply use [(\[Zcompo\])]{}. Approximations used {#s:checks} ------------------- Before diving into the calculation we first list the approximations made. 1. [We have dropped the of the background field: \phi_0 \to 0$]{} 2. [We neglected corrections and backreaction gravity]{} [We have evaluated field metric on the classical background.]{} 1\. In [@mp] we calculated the effective action in the SM taking into rolling of classical field \phi_0$. Generalizing standard calculate the effective action to the found the radiative corrections to both the classical and the terms. This allowed us to extract the $\delta_\lambda$ and $\delta_\phi$ counterterms from the effective We retrieved the standard results. The time-dependence does not affect the form of the counterterms. done the calculation in time-independent way, by $\dot we have the same counterterm. In the large field regime the time-dependence enters also the terms, which are non-minimal, and it may not be obvious can these effects. However, large field regime is inflationary and all time-dependent corrections roll Working in expansion as we do, they be neglected. 2\. In [@damien; we calculated the effective in a FLRW background. We showed that when in the [*Einstein frame*]{}, the backreaction from can be neglected. The reason is that the corrections are of the
 In particular, one needs also tO take into aCcounT thE laSt Term In thE expansion in [(\[Q\_eXPl\])]{}. BuT then $Z_{h} = Z_{\chi} = Z_\phi =1/Z_\xi$ is no LongeR a COnsiSTeNt solUtion; it WOuLD GivE tHe IncOnSIsTent rElaTion = (Q + Q\^2 +...) + Z\_\^[3/2]{} ( q\^2+ Q\^3 +...). Thus for Gb scAtTering one canNOt Really defiNe $Z_{\Chi}$, $Z_{h}$ in terms Of tHe elemEnTarY WavefUncTions [(\[zelemeNT\])]{}. FortuNately, thiS iS Also noT NecessaRY, BeCausE we can simply use [(\[ZcOMpO\])]{}.

approximations Used {#s:cHeCKs}
-------------------

bEForE diVing into thE cAlculATion we fIRsT LISt hERe the approximAtions made.

1.  [WE HavE droppEd The TIme-depEndenCe OF thE background FielD: $\dot \phi_0 \to 0$]{}

2.  [we have NEglecteD fLRW corRectioNs aNd tHe baCKrEaCtiOn OF grAViTy]{}

3.  [WE HavE evaluatEd ThE fielD metRIC ON the ClaSsicAl bacKground.]{}

1\. In [@mp] we CalCulaTEd tHe effEctivE actIoN in thE SM regIme, taKiNg into account thE rolLing of the ClaSsIcaL bAckgrOUnd fieLd $\dOt \pHi_0$. GenerAlizing STanDaRD TEcHniques to calculate ThE EFfEctive acTion to THe TiME-dependeNt SitUatiON, We fouNd thE RaDiative cOrrectIOnS tO both thE cLassicAl PotEntIal anD The kInetic Terms. ThiS alloWEd us to extract bOTh the $\delta_\lamBDa$ AND $\dELta_\pHi$ cOunterterms From THe efFectIVe ActIOn. We rEtrieVeD ThE Standard results. The tImE-depenDence Does not affect The form of tHE COunterteRms. HAD wE Done the calculaTion iN a time-indePEndent waY, by neGlecting $\Dot \phi_0$, we wOULd have foUnd The SamE $\deLTA_\lAmbda$ countertERM.

In tHe Large fiEld Regime tHe tIme-DepEndEnCe enters aLso the kiNeTiC tErMs, wHich aRE non-miniMaL, anD iT maY not bE ObviouS that We caN nEgLEct These efFEcTS. howeVeR, tHe laRge FiEld reGime IS thE inflatIonary regIme, ANd alL tImE-dependEnt correctionS aRe slow roll SuPprEssed. WORKing at leAding order in the expansioN ParametEr, aS we do, They Can be neglEctEd.

2\. In [@daMieN; @gMP] we cAlculaTed thE eFfeCTIve acTIOn In tHe sM regime, in A flRW BackgRoUnd. WE showed That when working in tHE [*EiNstein frame*]{}, thE baCkreACTiOn fROm GRavItY Can BE Neglected. The reaSon is that tHe COrRections arE Of tHe
 In particular, one needsalso to ta ke in toacc ou nt t he l ast term in th e  exp ansion in [(\[Q\_expl\ ])]{} .B ut t h en  $Z_{ h} = Z_ { \c h i } =  Z _\ phi  = 1 /Z _\xi$  is  no lon ger a cons ist en t solution;i twould give  th e inconsiste ntrelati on  =( Q + Q \^2  +... ) + Z\ _ \^[3/2 ]{} ( Q\^ 2+ Q\^3 + . ..). Th u s  f or G B scattering onec an n ot really defi ne $Z_ {\ c hi } $ , $ Z_{ h}$ in ter ms  of t h e eleme n ta r y wav e functions [(\ [Zelement\] ) ]{} . Fort un ate l y, thi s isal s o n ot necessar y, b ecause we  can s i mply us e  [(\[Zc ompo\] )]{ }.
App r ox im ati on s  us e d{#s : che cks}
--- -- -- ----- ---- - - - 
Bef ore  div ing i nto the calcu lat ionw e f irstlisthere  t he ap proxim ation smade.

1.  [Wehave  droppedthe  t ime -d epend e nce of  th e b ackgrou nd fiel d : $ \d o t \p hi_0 \to 0$]{}

2.  [ W ehave neg lected FL RW correcti on s a nd t h e  back reac t io n of gra vity]{ } 
3.   [We h av e eval ua ted  th e fie l d me tric o n the cl assic a l background.] { }

1\. In [@m p ]w e  c a lcul ate d the effec tive acti on i n  t heS M reg ime,ta k in g  into account the r ol ling o f the  classical ba ckground f i e l d $\dot\phi _ 0$ .  Generalizingstand ard techni q ues to c alcul ate theeffective a ction to  th e t ime -de p e nd ent situation , we f ou nd therad iativecor rec tio nsto  both the  classic al  p ot en tia l and the kine ti c t er ms.  This allowe d usto e xt ra c t b oth the $\ d e lta_ \l am bda$  an d$\del ta_\ p hi$  counte rterms fr omt he e ff ec tive ac tion. We retr ie ved the st an dar d resu l t s. The t ime-dependence does not affectthe  form  ofthe count ert erms.Had we don e thecalcu la tio n in at i me -in de pendent wa y ,  by  negl ec ting  $\dot\phi_0$, we wouldh ave  found the sa me$\de l t a_ \la m bd a $ c ou n ter t e rm.

In the lar ge field r eg i me  the time- d epe nd ence en ters al so th e  kineti c terms,which are  n on-m i n ima l, and itmay notbe obviou s  that we  canneg lect t he seeffec ts. Ho w eve r, th e larg efieldregim eis the i nflationary regime, and  all t ime-d epe ndent cor rec t ion s are slo w ro ll suppres sed . W orkin g a t  lead ingo rd eri n the  exp a nsion par a me ter , as  we do, the y c anbe ne gle c ted.
2\.In [@damien; @GMP ]  we calculated  the e ffe cti v e ac ti on in the SM r egi me , in a FLR Wbackground.  We show ed thatwhen w orking  in the [ *E i nstein  fra me* ]{}, thebac kr e actionfr om gravit y ca nbe neg lected .  The r eason is that th e cor r e ction s  ar e ofth e
 In_particular, one_needs also to take_into account_the_last term_in_the expansion in_[(\[Q\_expl\])]{}. But then_$Z_{h} = Z_{\chi} =_Z_\phi =1/Z_\xi$ is_no_longer a consistent solution; it would give the inconsistent relation = (Q + Q\^2_+...)_+ Z\_\^[3/2]{}_(_Q\^2+_Q\^3 +...). Thus for GB_scattering one cannot really define_$Z_{\chi}$, $Z_{h}$_in terms of the elementary wavefunctions [(\[Zelement\])]{}. Fortunately,_this_is also not_necessary, because we can simply use [(\[Zcompo\])]{}.

Approximations used {#s:checks}
-------------------

Before_diving into the calculation we first_list here the_approximations_made.

1._ [We have dropped_the time-dependence of the background field:_$\dot \phi_0 \to 0$]{}

2.  [We_have neglected FLRW corrections and the backreaction_of gravity]{}

3.  [We have evaluated_the field metric on the_classical background.]{}

1\._In [@mp] we calculated the_effective action in_the SM_regime, taking into_account the rolling of the classical_background field $\dot_\phi_0$. Generalizing standard techniques to calculate_the_effective action to_the_time-dependent_situation, we_found the radiative_corrections_to both_the_classical potential and the kinetic terms._This_allowed us to extract both the $\delta_\lambda$_and $\delta_\phi$ counterterms from_the_effective action. We retrieved_the standard results. The time-dependence_does not affect the form of_the counterterms._Had we_done the calculation in a time-independent way, by neglecting $\dot \phi_0$,_we would have found the same_$\delta_\lambda$ counterterm.

In the large_field regime_the_time-dependence enters also_the_kinetic terms,_which are non-minimal, and it may not_be obvious_that we can neglect these effects._However, the large field_regime_is the inflationary regime, and all_time-dependent corrections are slow roll suppressed._Working at leading order in_the_expansion_parameter, as we do, they_can be neglected.

2\. In [@damien; @GMP]_we calculated the_effective action in the SM regime, in_a_FLRW background. We showed that when_working_in the [*Einstein frame*]{}, the backreaction_from_gravity_can be neglected. The reason_is that the corrections are of_the