\section{Introduction}
The \emph{Reconstruction Theorem} is one of the cornerstones of the Theory of Regularity Structures \cite{Hai14}, the framework in which this theorem was first formulated.
This theory provides a milestone in the analysis of stochastic partial differential equations on the Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^d$, which is the original motivation for this theory, since it allows to apply fixed point techniques to such equations. \\
Stochastic partial differential equations are also closely related to quantum field theory, in particular through stochastic quantization \cite{PW81}, which links stochastic PDEs with the path integral formulation of Euclidean field theory. The idea at the heart of stochastic quantization is construct the path integral measure of an Euclidean interacting field theory as the invariant measure of a stochastic process whose dynamics is ruled by a parabolic non-linear stochastic PDE.
Recently, again in the interplay between stochastic PDEs and quantum field theory, there are also some efforts to apply the techniques proper of the latter to problems of the former, in particular for renormalization \cite{DDRZ20}.

Nonetheless, on account of general relativity, a natural and more general setting for quantum field theory is represented by curved spacetimes.
As a consequence, from the point of view of quantum field theory on curved spacetimes \cite{BFDY15, book, Fredenhagen:2014lda, DDR20}, in order to extend this fruitful interaction with stochastic PDEs also to this framework, it would be desirable to have a formulation of the theory of regularity structures on a smooth manifold and a first step in this direction should be the formulation of the reconstruction theorem on a smooth manifold. This is the aim of the present paper.
There are already some efforts to this end \cite{DDK19}, where the authors consider the Riemannian case.

Recently, in \cite{CZ20}, the authors proved that this result can be formulated as a result of distributions theory on the Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^d$, \emph{i.e.}, in $\mathcal{D}^\prime(\mathbb{R}^d)$, without any reference to the theory of regularity structures.
In particular, the problem is formulated in the following way.
If for any $x\in\mathbb{R}^d$ we are given a distribution $F_x\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\mathbb{R}^d)$, one may wonder whether there exists a distribution $f\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\mathbb{R}^d)$ which is \emph{locally} approximated, in a suitable sense, by $F_x$ in a neighbourhood of $x\in\mathbb{R}^d$, for any $x\in\mathbb{R}^d$.
In their paper, the authors proved that this is actually the case under a further hypothesis, dubbed \emph{coherence}, providing a bound for the difference $F_x-F_y$ for $y$ and $x$ sufficiently close.
This condition, which is closely related to the generalized H\"older condition, is inspired, in the language of regularity structures, by the notion of \emph{model} and of \emph{modelled distribution}.

From the viewpoint of the extension to the manifold setting, the main advantage of the formulation of \cite{CZ20} is that it is formulated in a purely distributional language.
Since distributions have an intrinsic \emph{local} nature, they can be considered in a very natural way also on generic smooth manifold $M$ \cite{Hor03, BGP07}. This argument makes this version of the reconstruction theorem the most convenient for the extension to the smooth manifold setting.

To this end we translate the notion of germ of distributions and the key notion of coherence to the case of a smooth manifold, yielding a more local definition of these notions.
Nonetheless, in Proposition \ref{Prop: independence from the atlas} we prove that the notion of coherence we give is actually independent of the atlas, in agreement with the locality of the whole construction. As a consequence we have a geometric notion of coherence.
\\

The main result of this paper is the reconstruction theorem, see Theorem \ref{Thm: reconstruction}, for $\gamma$-coherent germs of distributions, with $\gamma>0$, see Section \ref{Sec: main definitions} for details.
In particular, with the notation of Definition \ref{Def: coherence}, the main result is the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{Thm: main result}
Let $M$ be a $d$-dimensional smooth manifold and let $\mathcal{A}=\{(U_j,\phi_j)\}_{j}$ be an atlas over $M$.
Let $\gamma>0$ and let $F=(F_p)_{p\in M}$ be a $\gamma$-coherent germ of distributions on $(M,\mathcal{A})$.
There exists a unique distribution $\mathcal{R}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ such that, for any local chart $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$, $\phi_*(\mathcal{R}F)\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi(U))$ satisfies, for any compact set $K\subset U$ and for any $h\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$,
\begin{align*}
|(\phi_*(\mathcal{R}F)-\phi_*(F_p))(h_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|\lesssim\lambda^\gamma\,,
\end{align*}
uniformly for $p\in K$ and for $\lambda\in(0,1]$.
\end{theorem}

This result is proven as a consequence of a localized (on an open set) version of the reconstruction theorem of \cite{CZ20} and of the very characterization of the notion of distribution on a smooth manifold -- see Appendix \ref{Appendix: distribution on manifold} and \cite{Hor03}.
A further advantage of our result is that it shows that the reconstruction theorem holds true already at the level of smooth manifolds, without calling for further structures, such as Riemannian ones.

Finally, we discuss in detail the dependence of the reconstruction on the the atlas for $\gamma$-coherent germs of distributions with $\gamma>0$.
In particular, in Theorem \ref{Thm: coherence wrt different atlases} we prove that, in such a scenario, the reconstruction is independent of the atlas.

In the Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^d$ setting, if the coherence parameter $\gamma$ is non-positive, one has existence of the reconstruction, yet without uniqueness.
This result can be achieved also on the smooth manifold setting, as we discuss in Theorem \ref{Rmk: gamma<0}, where we prove existence without uniqueness of the global reconstructed distributions. We underline that, in addition to being non-unique, these global reconstructed distributions depend on the atlas and on the partition of unity used to construct them.

\paragraph{Outline of the Paper}
The paper is organized as follows: in Section \ref{Sec: main definitions} we introduce the notion of \emph{germ of distributions} on a smooth manifold $M$ and the notion of \emph{coherence}, which is the key to the reconstruction.
In this section we also discuss \emph{enhanced coherence}. Moreover, in this section we prove that coherence does not depend on the atlas.\\
In Section \ref{Sec: Reconstruction theorem} we state and prove the \emph{reconstruction theorem} for a $\gamma$-coherent germ of distributions on a smooth manifold, with $\gamma>0$.
In the same section we also discuss the independence of the reconstruction from the atlas for $\gamma>0$. Eventually, we state and prove the reconstruction theorem for $\gamma$-coherent germs of distributions with $\gamma\leq0$. \\
Finally, on the one hand, in Appendix \ref{Appendix: distribution on manifold} we shall recall some notions of distributions theory on smooth manifolds in order for the paper to be self-contained. On the other hand, in Appendix \ref{Appendix: enhanced coherence on an open set} we discuss coherence and enhanced coherence on an open set of the Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^d$, which is a propedeutical case study to the case of a smooth manifold.

\paragraph{Notation}
In the following, $M$ will denote a $d$-dimensional connected smooth manifold such that $\partial M=\emptyset$. Moreover, we will endow the manifold $M$ with the Borel $\sigma$-algebra. The pair $(U,\phi)$ denotes a generic local chart of $U$: \emph{i.e.}, $U\subset M$ is an open set and $\phi:U\to\phi(U)\subset\mathbb{R}^d$ is a diffeomorphism, representing a coordinate on $U$. Given a generic function $f:M\to N$, with $M$ and $N$ smooth manifold, $f^*$ and $f_*$ shall denote the pull-back and the push-forward, respectively, via this map.

We write $\mathcal{D}(M)$ for the space of smooth and compactly supported functions over $M$, endowed with the usual locally convex topology and $\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ shall denote the space of distributions over $M$, see Appendix \ref{Appendix: distribution on manifold} for further details. Moreover, $B(0,1)\subset\mathbb{R}^d$ will be the unitary ball centred at the origin.
Given $U\subset\mathbb{R}^d$ and a function $f\in\mathcal{D}(U)$, we introduce the following rescaled version of this function, for $x\in U$,
\begin{align}\label{Eq: scaled test-function}
f_x^\lambda(y)\vcentcolon=\lambda^{-d}f(\lambda^{-1}(y-x))
\end{align}
for $\lambda\in(0,1]$. We shall also adopt the following convention: $f^\lambda\equiv f^\lambda_0$.
In the following, we shall integrate test-functions $f\in\mathcal{D}(\mathbb{R}^d)$ with respect to the Lebesgue measure $dx$ on $\mathbb{R}^d$. This is just for convenience, a priori we could consider any measure on $\mathbb{R}^d$ which is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure.
Eventually, the symbol $\lesssim$ shall denote the inequality up to a multiplicative finite constant.

\paragraph{Acknowledgements.}
We are thankful to  F. Caravenna, C. Dappiaggi, N. Drago and L. Zambotti for helpful discussions on the topic. We are thankful to  C. Dappiaggi for the valuable comments on a first version of this manuscript. The work of the authors is supported by a Doctoral Fellowship of the University of Pavia.
The work of P.R. was partly supported by a fellowship of the ``Progetto Giovani GNFM 2019" under the project ``Factorization Algebras vs AQFTs on Riemannian manifolds" fostered by the National Group of Mathematical Physics (GNFM-INdAM).

\section{Main Definitions}\label{Sec: main definitions}
In this section we shall define the main tools we are going to use in the paper. We shall also prove some of their properties.

Following \cite{CZ20}, we start by introducing the notion of \emph{germ} of distributions.
\begin{definition}
Let $M$ be a $d$-dimensional smooth manifold. We define \emph{germ of distributions} over $M$ a family $F=\{F_p\}_{p\in M}$ of distributions, $F_p\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ for any $p\in M$, such that, for any $h\in\mathcal{D}(M)$, $p\mapsto F_p(h)$ is a measurable map with respect to the Borel $\sigma$-algebra of the manifold $M$.
\end{definition}

\begin{remark}
The idea at the heart of the notion of germ of distributions is that, under a further assumption which is \emph{coherence}, $F_p$ can be seen as an approximation, locally at the point $p\in M$, of a global distribution $\mathcal{R}F$. The idea of the reconstruction theorem is that of associating, under suitable assumptions, this (unique) global distribution with the germ of distributions.
\end{remark}
We shall now define the notion of coherent germ of distributions on a manifold, which is the key for the reconstruction theorem.
\begin{definition}\label{Def: coherence}
Let $M$ be a smooth $d$-dimensional manifold and let $\mathcal{A}=\{(U_\alpha,\phi_\alpha)\}_{\alpha}$ be a smooth atlas on $M$.
Let $F=(F_p)_{p\in M}$ be a germ of distributions on $M$ and $\gamma\in\mathbb{R}$. We say that $F$ is $\gamma$-coherent on $(M,\mathcal{A})$ if for any $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$ there exists $f\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$, with $\int_{\mathbb{R}^d} dx\,f(x)\neq0$, such that for any compact set $K\subset U$ there exists $\alpha_K^U\leq\min\{0,\gamma\}$ such that
\begin{align}\label{Eq: coherence condition}
\vert(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_q))(f^\lambda_{\phi(q)})\vert\lesssim\lambda^{\alpha_K^U}(|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_K^U}\,,
\end{align}
uniformly for $p,q\in K$, $\lambda\in(0,1]$.
\end{definition}

\begin{remark}
At first sight, the above definition depends on the atlas $\mathcal{A}$. Nonetheless in Proposition \ref{Prop: independence from the atlas} we shall prove that the above definition is actually independent of the atlas.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}\label{Rmk: who cares about 1}
In the previous definition, we adopted the constraint $\lambda\in(0,1]$. Nonetheless, this can be replaced by $\lambda\in(0,\eta]$, for any $\eta>0$. Indeed, all bounds are given up to a multiplicative constant. We shall use this fact in the following when discussing enhanced coherence in Appendix \ref{Appendix: enhanced coherence on an open set}. Moreover, in the following we shall be interested in the behaviour of all structures for $\lambda\to0^+$. These are not influenced by the choice of $\eta>0$.
\end{remark}

First of all, we can refine the dependence on the atlas of the notion of coherence. In particular, it is independent of the coordinates.
\begin{proposition}\label{Proposition: independence on charts}
With the notation of Definition \ref{Def: coherence}, let $F$ be a $\gamma$-coherent germ on $(M,\mathcal{A})$ and let $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$. Let $(U,\psi)$ be a second chart on the same open set $U\subset M$. Then the $\gamma$-coherence condition holds true also with respect to the chart $(U,\psi)$. Moreover, also the $\bm{\alpha}^U$ parameters are independent of the coordinates.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
First of all, coherence on $(M,\mathcal{A})$, entails the existence of a test-function $f\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$ with $\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}dx\,f(x)\neq0$ such that for any compact set $K\subset U$ there exists $\alpha_K^U\leq\min\{0,\gamma\}$ for which
\begin{align*}
\vert(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_q))(f^\lambda_{\phi(q)})\vert\lesssim\lambda^{\alpha_K^U}(|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_K^U}\,,
\end{align*}
uniformly for $p,q\in K$, and for $\lambda\in(0,1]$.
We prove that there exists a test-function $\tilde{g}\in\mathcal{D}(\psi(U))$ such that the coherence condition with respect to the chart $(U,\psi)$ is satisfied. For any $g\in\mathcal{D}(\psi(U))$, it holds
\begin{align*}
\vert(\psi_*(F_p)-\psi_*(F_q))(g^\lambda_{\psi(q)})\vert&=\vert((\psi\circ\phi^{-1})_*\phi_*(F_p)-(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})_*\phi_*(F_q))(g^\lambda_{\psi(q)})\vert\\
&\lesssim \vert(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_q))((\psi\circ\phi^{-1})^*g)^\lambda_{\phi(q)}\vert\,,
\end{align*}
where  the last inequality descends from $\|\mathrm{Jac}(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})\|_\infty\lesssim1$, where $\|\cdot\|_\infty$ denotes the supremum norm and $\mathrm{Jac}(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})$ denotes the Jacobian of coordinates change. We can now choose $\tilde{g}\in\mathcal{D}(\psi(U))$ such that $(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})^*\tilde{g}=f$, with $f\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$ as above. As a consequence, we get
\begin{align*}
\vert(\psi_*(F_p)-\psi_*(F_q))(\tilde{g}^\lambda_{\psi(q)})\vert\lesssim\lambda^{\alpha_K^U}(|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_K^U}\lesssim\lambda^{\alpha_K^U}(|\psi(p)-\psi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_K^U}\,,
\end{align*}
where in the last inequality we exploited the uniform bound
\begin{align*}
\sup_{\overset{p,q\in K}{p\neq q}}\frac{|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|}{|\psi(p)-\psi(q)|}\lesssim1\,.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}\label{Remark: equivalent definition of coherence}
The notion of coherence of a germ of distributions can be stated in an equivalent form by splitting the two cases $|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|\leq\lambda$ and $|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|>\lambda$. In particular, Equation \eqref{Eq: coherence condition} can be rewritten as
\begin{align}\label{Eq: equivalent definition of coherence}
\vert(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_q))(f^\lambda_{\phi(q)})\vert\lesssim
 \begin{cases}
\lambda^{\gamma}\,,&\qquad\mathrm{if}\quad0\leq |\phi(p)-\phi(q)|\leq\lambda\,, \\
\lambda^{\alpha^U_K}|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|^{\gamma-\alpha_K^U}\,,&\qquad\mathrm{if}\quad |\phi(p)-\phi(q)|>\lambda\,, \\
   \end{cases}
\end{align}
\end{remark}
\paragraph{Enhanced Coherence}
In this paragraph we shall refine the notion of coherence on a smooth manifold. This leads to the notion of \emph{enhanced coherence}.
In the same spirit of \cite{CZ20}, the idea is to drop the dependence on the particular test function $f\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$.
To this end, we resort to the same argument for the case of an open subset of $\mathbb{R}^d$.
Indeed, on account of Definition \ref{Def: coherence}, given a $\gamma$-coherent germ $F_p$ on a smooth manifold $(M,\mathcal{A})$ and a local chart $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$, $\mathcal{F}_{\phi(p)}\vcentcolon=\phi_*(F_p)$ is a $\gamma$-coherent germ of distributions on the open set $\phi(U)\subset\mathbb{R}^d$, in the sense of Definition \ref{Def:coherence on an open set}.
As a consequence, we can apply \emph{locally} Proposition \ref{Prop:enhanced_coherence on an open set} to get the following definition of coherence on a smooth manifold, which is equivalent to Definition \ref{Def: coherence} -- \textit{cf}. Appendix \ref{Appendix: enhanced coherence on an open set}.

\begin{definition}\label{Def: coherence final version}
Let $M$ be a smooth $d$-dimensional manifold and let $\mathcal{A}=\{(U_\alpha,\phi_\alpha)\}_{\alpha}$ be a smooth atlas on $M$.
Let $F=(F_p)_{p\in M}$ be a germ of distributions on $M$ and let $\gamma\in\mathbb{R}$. We say that $F$ is $\gamma$-coherent on $(M,\mathcal{A})$ if for any $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$ and for any $K\subset U$ compact there exists $\alpha_K^U\leq\min\{0,\gamma\}$ such that, for any $r>-\alpha_K^U$
\begin{align}\label{Eq: enhanced coherence}
|(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_q))(u_{\phi(q)}^\lambda)|\lesssim\|u\|_{C^r}\lambda^{\alpha_K^U}(|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_K^U}\,,
\end{align}
uniformly for $p,q\in K$, $\lambda\in(0,1]$ and $u\in\mathcal{D}(B(0,1))$, where $B(0,1)\subset\mathbb{R}^d$ denotes the unitary ball centred at the origin.
\end{definition}

\begin{remark}
Although Definition \ref{Def: coherence} and Definition \ref{Def: coherence final version}  are equivalent, the latter is more advantageous. Indeed, it establishes a bound which is independent of the test function. As a by product, it also provides the space of $\gamma$-coherent germs of distributions with a vector space structure. At the same time, Definition \ref{Def: coherence} is preferable from a computational point of view, since it allows to establish coherence by only checking the defining property for a single test-function.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
Observe that the equivalence between Definition \ref{Def: coherence} and Definition \ref{Def: coherence final version} entails that also the notion of enhanced coherence is independent of the coordinates -- see Proposition \ref{Proposition: independence on charts}. Alternatively, this independence can be proven directly following an approach similar to that of Proposition \ref{Proposition: independence on charts} and exploiting the boundedness property of the Jacobian of the change of coordinates.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}\label{Rmk: coherence is stable wrt restriction}
On account of Proposition \ref{Prop:restriction on an open set}, also in the case of a smooth manifold, the notion of coherence is stable under restriction of an open set. More precisely, adopting the same notation of Definition \ref{Def: coherence final version}, if we consider $V\subset U$, then $F_p$ is a $\gamma$-coherent germ of distributions in the sense of Definition \ref{Def: coherence final version} also with respect to any local chart $(V,\phi)$.
\end{remark}
We are now in position to prove that coherence is independent of the atlas.

\begin{proposition}\label{Prop: independence from the atlas}
Let $M$ be a smooth $d$-dimensional manifold and let $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{A}^\prime$ be smooth atlases on $M$. Let $F=\{F_p\}_{p\in M}$ be a germ of distributions over $M$. If $F=\{F_p\}_{p\in M}$ is $\gamma$-coherent with respect to $(M,\mathcal{A})$, then it is $\gamma$-coherent also with respect to $(M,\mathcal{A}^\prime)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
In order to prove this result, on account of the definition of coherence, it suffices to prove that for any $(U^\prime,\phi^\prime)\in\mathcal{A}^\prime$, $F$ satisfies the bound of Equation \eqref{Eq: enhanced coherence} on $U^\prime$.
Notice moreover that we can focus on the open set $U^\prime$, \textit{i.e.}, neglecting the local chart $\phi^\prime$, since in Proposition \ref{Proposition: independence on charts} we proved that coherence is independent of the coordinates.
Hence, let $U^\prime\in\mathcal{A}^\prime$.
There exists a family $\{U_i\}_{i\in I}\subset\mathcal{A}$ of open sets such that $U^\prime=\bigcup_{i\in I}U_i\cap U^\prime=\bigcup_{i\in I}U_i^\prime$, where we set $U_i^\prime\vcentcolon=U_i\cap U^\prime$.
Notice that by independence of the coordinate, \textit{cf.} Proposition  \ref{Proposition: independence on charts}, and by stability of coherence under restriction of the open set, \textit{cf.} Remark \ref{Rmk: coherence is stable wrt restriction}, $F_p$ satisfies the bound of $\gamma$-coherence, given by Equation \eqref{Eq: enhanced coherence}, on all the open sets $U^\prime_i$, for $i\in I$.
Moreover, all these sets being contained in $U^\prime$, we can set on all of them a unique coordinate, which we call $\phi$.
In order to prove the thesis, we first prove the following claim: the coherence bound of Equation \eqref{Eq: enhanced coherence} holds true on the union of two open sets $U^\prime_j$ and $U^\prime_\ell$, with $U^\prime_j\cap U^\prime_\ell\neq\emptyset$. \\
To this end, let $K\subset U^\prime_j\cup U^\prime_\ell$ be a compact set. Notice that if the compact set $K$ is contained in one of the two open sets $U^\prime_j$ or $U^\prime_\ell$, then the thesis holds true by construction.
It remains to consider only the case of a compact set $K\subset U^\prime_j\cup U^\prime_\ell$ such that $K\cap U^\prime_k\neq\emptyset$ and $K\cap U^\prime_j\neq\emptyset$. \\
In this scenario, we can split the compact set as $K=K_j\cup K_\ell$, with $K_j\subset U^\prime_j$ and $K_\ell\subset U^\prime_\ell$ compact sets and $K_j\cap K_\ell\neq\emptyset$.
 In the next step, we shall prove the coherence bound, Equation \eqref{Eq: enhanced coherence}, uniformly on $p,q\in K$.
 Notice that whether this two points were both contained in one of the two compact set $K_j$ or $K_\ell$, then the proof is already complete since these two compact sets are contained in $U^\prime_j$ and $U^\prime_\ell$ respectively.
 As a consequence, it only remains to discuss the case with $p\in K_j\setminus U^\prime_\ell$ and $q\in K_\ell\setminus U^\prime_j$.\\
For any $u\in\mathcal{D}(B(0,1))$, by triangular inequality,
\begin{align}\label{Eq: first estimate}
|(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_q))(u^\lambda_{\phi(q)})|\leq
\underset{|A|}{\underbrace{|(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_a))(u^\lambda_{\phi(q)})|}}+\underset{|B|}{\underbrace{|(\phi_*(F_a)-\phi_*(F_q))(u^\lambda_{\phi(q)})|}}\,,
\end{align}
for any $a\in K_j\cap K_\ell$.
Moreover, we fix $r>\max\big\{-\alpha_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j},-\alpha_{K_\ell}^{U^\prime_\ell}\big\}$.
We separately estimate $|A|$ and $|B|$. First, on account of the choice of $r$ and of $a$, we have, by Equation \eqref{Eq: enhanced coherence} on $U^\prime_\ell$,
\begin{align*}
|B|\lesssim\|u\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\lambda^{\alpha_{K_\ell}^{U^\prime_\ell}}(|\phi(a)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_{K_\ell}^{U^\prime_\ell}}\,,
\end{align*}
uniformly for $a,q\in K_\ell$ and for $\lambda\in(0,1]$. Moreover, notice that as a consequence of the estimate
\begin{align}\label{Eq: general estimate}
\sup_{\overset{\lambda\in(0,1]}{a\in K_j\cap K_\ell}}\sup_{\overset{p\in K_j\setminus U^\prime_\ell}{q\in K_\ell\setminus U^\prime_j}}\frac{(|\phi(a)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_{K_\ell}^{U^\prime_\ell}}}{(|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_{K_\ell}^{U^\prime_\ell}}}\lesssim 1\,,
\end{align}
we get
\begin{align}\label{Eq: bound for |B|}
|B|\lesssim\|u\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\lambda^{\alpha_{K_\ell}^{U^\prime_\ell}}(|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_{K_\ell}^{U^\prime_\ell}}\,.
\end{align}
The estimate for $|A|$ requires some more steps: first of all, we notice that in $|A|$ the test-function is centred at $\phi(q)$. Nonetheless, we can center it at the point $\phi(a)$ by exploiting the argument used in the proof of \cite[Prop. 6.2]{CZ20}. This is achieved by noticing that
\begin{align*}
u^\lambda_{\phi(q)}=\tilde{u}^{\lambda_1}_{\phi(a)}\,,\qquad\mathrm{with}\qquad\tilde{u}\vcentcolon=u^{\lambda_2}_w\,,
\end{align*}
with
\begin{align*}
\lambda_1=|\phi(q)-\phi(a)|+\lambda\,,\qquad\lambda_2=\frac{\lambda}{\lambda_1}\,,\qquad w=\frac{\phi(q)-\phi(a)}{|\phi(q)-\phi(a)|+\lambda}\,.
\end{align*}
On account of this and of the coherence on $U_j^\prime$, we get
\begin{align*}
|A|\lesssim\|\tilde{u}\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\lambda^{\alpha_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}}(|\phi(p)-\phi(a)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}}\,.
\end{align*}
By definition of $\tilde{u}$,
\begin{align*}
\|\tilde{u}\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\lesssim\lambda_2^{-r-d}\|u\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\lesssim\lambda^{-r-d}\|u\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\,.
\end{align*}
Hence, we get
\begin{align*}
|A|\lesssim\|u\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\lambda^{\alpha_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}-r-d}(|\phi(p)-\phi(a)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}}\lesssim\|u\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\lambda^{\widetilde{\alpha}_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}}(|\phi(p)-\phi(a)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\widetilde{\alpha}_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}}\,,
\end{align*}
where, in the last inequality we set $\widetilde{\alpha}_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}\vcentcolon=\alpha_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}-r-d$ and where, always in the last inequality, we used
\begin{align*}
\sup_{\overset{\lambda\in(0,1], p\in K_j\setminus U^\prime_\ell}{a\in K_j\cap K_\ell}}(\lambda+|\phi(p)-\phi(a)|)^{-r-d}\lesssim 1\,.
\end{align*}
With a bound analogous to Equation \eqref{Eq: general estimate}, we conclude
\begin{align}\label{Eq: bound for |A|}
|A|\lesssim\|u\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\lambda^{\widetilde{\alpha}_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}}(|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\widetilde{\alpha}_{K_j}^{U^\prime_j}}\,.
\end{align}
Finally, on account of Equations \eqref{Eq: first estimate}, \eqref{Eq: bound for |B|} and \eqref{Eq: bound for |A|}, setting $\alpha_K^{U^\prime_j\cup U_\ell^\prime}\vcentcolon=\min\{\alpha_{K_\ell}^{U_\ell^\prime}, \widetilde{\alpha}_{K_j}^{U_j^\prime}\}$, we get, for any $r>-\alpha_K^{U^\prime_j\cup U_\ell^\prime}$,
\begin{align*}
|(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_q))(u^\lambda_{\phi(q)})|\lesssim\|u\|_{\mathrm{C}^r}\lambda^{\alpha_K^{U^\prime_j\cup U_\ell^\prime}}(|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_K^{U^\prime_j\cup U_\ell^\prime}}\,,
\end{align*}
uniformly on $p,q\in K$. This concludes the proof of the claim. In order to conclude the proof of the proposition, we distinguish two cases. On the one hand, if the open set $U^\prime$ is bounded, then the proof is complete since $U^\prime$ can be covered by a finite number of open sets $U_i\in\mathcal{A}$ and it suffices to iterate the above procedure for a finite number of times. On the other hand, if $U^\prime$ is unbounded, it suffices to notice that for any compact set $K\subset U^\prime$, there exists a finite subset $J\subset I$ of indices such that $K\subset\cup_{j\in J}U^\prime_j$. As a consequence, we can get a coherence parameter $\alpha_K^{U^\prime}$ for $K$ by iterating the above claim a finite number of times.
\end{proof}

We give two simple examples of coherent germs on a smooth manifold.
\begin{example}
A simple example of coherent germ of distributions on a smooth manifold $M$ is the following. Consider a distribution $t\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ and set $F_p\vcentcolon=t$ for any $p\in M$. Since $F_p-F_q=0$ for any $p,q\in M$, we conclude that, on any $U\subset M$, $\{F_p\}_{p\in M}$ is coherent with any parameters $(\bm{\alpha}^U,\gamma)$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
Notice that our construction is a generalization of the one of \cite{CZ20}: indeed, we recover their construction if we consider the case $M=\mathbb{R}^d$ endowed of the trivial atlas $(\mathbb{R}^d,\mathrm{Id})$. As a consequence, all examples discussed in \cite{CZ20}, such as Taylor polynomials, are coherent germs with respect to this atlas.
\end{example}

\begin{comment}
\begin{remark}\label{Example: euclidean case}
We underline that, being the coherence of a germ of distributions on a manifold a notion stable with respect to restriction, \textit{cf}. Remark \ref{Rmk: coherence is stable wrt restriction}, and independent of the coordinates, \textit{cf}. Proposition \ref{Proposition: independence on charts}, coherence with respect to the trivial atlas $(\mathbb{R}^d,\mathrm{Id})$ implies that on all the possible atlases over the manifold $M=\mathbb{R}^d$, \textit{cf}. Remark \ref{Rmk: different atlases} for some more details about this topic.
\end{remark}
\end{comment}

Eventually, we introduce a \emph{homogeneity} parameter for coherent germs of distributions.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lemma: homogeneity}
Let $F=(F_p)_{p\in M}$ be a $\gamma$-coherent germ of distributions on a smooth manifold $(M,\mathcal{A})$ and let $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$ be a local chart. For any compact set $K\subset U$, there exists $\beta_K^U<\gamma$ such that
\begin{align}\label{Eq: homogeneity condition}
\vert \phi_*(F_p)(f_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)\vert\lesssim\lambda^{\beta_K^U}\,,
\end{align}
uniformly for $p\in K$, $\lambda\in(0,1]$ and where $f\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$ is chosen as in Definition \ref{Def: coherence}. We say that $F$ is \emph{locally homogeneous} in $U$ with parameters $\bm{\beta}^U=(\beta_K^U)_K$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is analogous to that on $\mathbb{R}^d$ \cite{CZ20}.
First of all, given a compact set $K\subset U$ and $q\in K$, since $\phi_*(F_q)\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi(U))$, there exists, \textit{cf}. \cite[Remark 3.5]{CZ20}, $r\in\mathbb{N}$ such that
\begin{align*}
\vert \phi_*(F_q)(f_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)\vert\lesssim\lambda^{-d-r}\,,
\end{align*}
uniformly for $p\in K$ and for $\lambda\in(0,1]$. Moreover, since $\mathrm{Diam}(\phi(K))\vcentcolon=\sup_{p,q\in K}|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|<\infty$, on account of the coherence condition it holds, uniformly for $p,q\in K$,
\begin{align*}
\vert(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_q))(f^\lambda_{\phi(q)})\vert\lesssim\lambda^{\alpha_K^U}(|\phi(p)-\phi(q)|+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_K^U}\leq\lambda^{\alpha_K^U}(\mathrm{Diam}(\phi(K))+\lambda)^{\gamma-\alpha_K^U}\lesssim\lambda^{\alpha_K^U}\,.
\end{align*}
In addition, thanks to the triangular inequality it descends
\begin{align*}
\vert \phi_*(F_p)(f_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)\vert\leq\vert \phi_*(F_q)(f_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)\vert+\vert(\phi_*(F_p)-\phi_*(F_q))(f_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)\vert\lesssim\lambda^{-d-r}+\lambda^{\alpha_K^U}\lesssim\lambda^{\min\{-d-r,\alpha_K^U\}}\,.
\end{align*}
As a consequence, it suffices to choose any $\beta_K^U\leq\min\{-d-r,\alpha_K^U\}$. Eventually, we can choose $\beta_K^U\leq\min\{-d-r,\alpha_K^U,\gamma\}$. This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
Similarly to the case of the coherence parameters, also those related to homogeneity are independent of the coordinates.

\begin{proposition}
Let $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$ be a local chart on a smooth manifold $M$ and let $F=(F_p)_{p\in M}$ be a $\gamma$-coherent germ with respect to $(M,\mathcal{A})$. Moreover let $f\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$ be the test-function as per Definition \ref{Def: coherence}. Let $\bm{\beta}^U=(\beta_K^U)_K$ be the homogeneity parameters of $F$, as per Lemma \ref{Lemma: homogeneity}. Let $(U,\psi)$ be a local chart on the same open set $U\subset M$. Then the homogeneity condition, \textit{cf}. Equation \eqref{Eq: homogeneity condition}, holds true also with respect to $(U,\psi)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $K\subset U$ be a compact set and let $(U,\phi)$ ad $(U,\psi)$ be as above. It holds, uniformly for $p\in K$ and $\lambda\in(0,1]$,
\begin{align*}
\vert \psi_*(F_p)(((\phi\circ\psi^{-1})^*f)_{\psi(p)}^\lambda)\vert \lesssim \lvert \phi_*(F_p)(f_{\phi(p)}^\lambda) \rvert \lesssim \lambda^{\beta^U_K}\,,
\end{align*}
where in the first inequality we exploited $\|\mathrm{Jac}(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})\|_\infty\lesssim1$, whereas in the last inequality we used the homogeneity hypothesis with respect to the chart $(U,\phi)$. It follows that $\psi_*(F_p)$ has homogeneities $(\beta_K^U)$ with respect to the test function $(\phi\circ\psi^{-1})^*f\in\mathcal{D}(\psi(U))$.
\end{proof}

\section{Reconstruction Theorem}\label{Sec: Reconstruction theorem}
We are now in position to state the main result of the paper, the \emph{reconstruction theorem} on a smooth manifold, for $\gamma$-coherent germs of distributions with $\gamma>0$, \textit{cf}. Theorem \ref{Thm: main result}.
\begin{theorem}\label{Thm: reconstruction}
Let $M$ be a $d$-dimensional smooth manifold and let $\mathcal{A}=\{(U_j,\phi_j)\}_{j}$ be an atlas over $M$. Let $\gamma>0$ and let $F=(F_p)_{p\in M}$ be a $\gamma$-coherent germ of distributions on $(M,\mathcal{A})$. There exists a unique distribution $\mathcal{R}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ such that, for any $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$, $\phi_*(\mathcal{R}F)\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi(U))$ and it satisfies, for any compact set $K\subset U$ and for any $h\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$,
\begin{align}\label{Eq: reconstruction}
|(\phi_*(\mathcal{R}F)-\phi_*(F_p))(h_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|\lesssim\lambda^\gamma\,,
\end{align}
uniformly for $p\in K$ and $\lambda\in(0,1]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof of this result is mainly based on the application of two theorems, namely \cite[Theor. 4.4]{CZ20} and Theorem \ref{Trm: Hormander}.
First of all, on account of Definition \ref{Def: coherence}, for any $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$, $\mathcal{F}_{\phi(p)}\vcentcolon=\phi_*(F_p)$ is a $\gamma$-coherent germ on the open set $\phi(U)\subset\mathbb{R}^d$, with $\gamma>0$.
As a consequence, \cite[Theor. 4.4]{CZ20} implies the existence of a unique distribution $(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi(U))$ such that, for any compact set $K\subset U$ and for any $h\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$
\begin{align}\label{Eq: defining reconstruction}
|((\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}-\phi_*(F_p))(h_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|\lesssim\lambda^\gamma\,,
\end{align}
uniformly for $p\in K$ and for $\lambda\in(0,1]$.
Thus we have a family of local distributions $(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi_j(U_j)}\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi_j(U_j))$, labelled by the local charts within the atlas $\mathcal{A}$.
Due to Theorem \ref{Trm: Hormander}, this family identifies a unique distribution, $\mathcal{R}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$, such that $\phi_*(\mathcal{R}F)=(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}$ for any $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$, if and only if
\begin{align}\label{Eq: overlapping condition}
(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}=(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})^*(\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)}\qquad\mathrm{on}\quad\phi(U\cap V)\,,
\end{align}
for any $(U,\phi),(V,\psi)\in\mathcal{A}$. To this end, we fix a compact $K\subset U\cap V$ and we notice that for any $g\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U\cap V))$,
\begin{align*}
|((\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}-(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})^*&(\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)})(g_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|\\
\leq&\,\underset{|A|}{\underbrace{|((\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}-\phi_*(F_p))(g_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|}}+\underset{|B|}{\underbrace{|((\psi\circ\phi^{-1})^*(\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)}-\phi_*(F_p))(g_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|}}\,.
\end{align*}
By construction, on the one hand $|A|\lesssim\lambda^\gamma$ uniformly on $p\in K$ and $\lambda\in(0,1]$. On the other hand, again uniformly on $p\in K$ and for $\lambda\in(0,1]$,
\begin{align*}
|B|=|((\phi\circ\psi^{-1})_*(\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)}-\phi_*(F_p))(g_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|\lesssim|((\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)}-\psi_*(F_p))((\phi\circ\psi^{-1})^*g)_{\psi(p)}^\lambda|\lesssim\lambda^\gamma\,,
\end{align*}
where in the first inequality we exploited $\|\mathrm{Jac}(\phi\circ\psi^{-1})\|_\infty\lesssim1$, whereas in the last inequality we used the defining inequality, Equation \eqref{Eq: defining reconstruction}, of $(\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)}$ together with $(\phi\circ\psi^{-1})^*g\in\mathcal{D}(\psi(V))$. Summarizing,
\begin{align*}
|((\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}-(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})^*(\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)})(g_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|\lesssim\lambda^\gamma\,,
\end{align*}
uniformly on $p\in K$ and $\lambda\in(0,1]$. Finally, exploiting $\gamma>0$,
\begin{align*}
|((\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}-(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})^*(\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)})(g_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|\to0\qquad\mathrm{for}\quad\lambda\to0^+\,.
\end{align*}
Applying Lemma \ref{Lemma: partial evaluation} to the distribution $T\vcentcolon=(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}-(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})^*(\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)}$ on the open set $\phi(U\cap V)$, we get
\begin{align*}
(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}=(\psi\circ\phi^{-1})^*(\mathcal{R}F)^{\psi(V)}\qquad\mathrm{on}\quad\phi(U\cap V)\,.
\end{align*}
This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}
On account of a local version of \cite[Thm. 12.7]{CZ20} and of the \emph{homogeneity} of germs of distributions -- see Lemma \ref{Lemma: homogeneity}, one can conclude that the reconstructed distributions $\{(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}\}_{(U,\phi)}$ appearing in the proof of the reconstruction theorem are actually elements of $\mathcal{C}^{\beta^U}$, which is a \emph{H\"older space of negative regularity} \cite[Section 12]{CZ20}. As a consequence of our construction of Theorem \ref{Thm: reconstruction} we conclude that locally the distribution $\mathcal{R}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ is of regularity $\mathcal{C}^{\beta^U}$.
\end{remark}

In the next theorem we investigate in detail the dependence of the \emph{reconstructed distribution} on the atlas. In particular, we shall prove that given a germ of distributions which is $\gamma$-coherent, with $\gamma>0$, then the reconstruction is independent of the atlas.
\begin{theorem}\label{Thm: coherence wrt different atlases}
Let $M$ be a $d$-dimensional smooth manifold and let $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{A}^\prime$ be two atlases over $M$. Let $\gamma>0$ and let $F=\{F_p\}_{p\in M}$ be a $\gamma$-coherent germ of distributions. Denote with $\mathcal{R}_\mathcal{A}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ and $\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}^\prime}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ the reconstructed distributions associated with the germ $F$ with respect to $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{A}^\prime$, as per Theorem \ref{Thm: reconstruction}. Then $\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}}F=\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}^\prime}F$, \textit{i.e.}, the reconstruction is independent of the atlas.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Exploiting Theorem \ref{Thm: reconstruction}, we can associate with the germ $F$ and with the atlas $(M,\mathcal{A})$ the global distribution $\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$, which is identified by means of Theorem \ref{Trm: Hormander} by the family $\{(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}}F)^{\phi(U)}\}_{(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}}$, with $(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}}F)^{\phi(U)}\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi(U))$.
Moreover, let $(U^\prime,\phi^\prime)\in\mathcal{A}^\prime$ be a local chart in the atlas $\mathcal{A}^\prime$.
 On the one hand, we can introduce the distribution $\phi^\prime_*(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}}F)\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi^\prime(U^\prime))$ while, on the other hand, as a consequence of Theorem \ref{Thm: reconstruction} applied with reference to the atlas $\mathcal{A}^\prime$, it descends that the distribution $(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}^\prime}F)^{\phi^\prime(U^\prime)}\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi^\prime(U^\prime))$.
 Recalling the notion of distribution on a manifold, \textit{cf}. Appendix \ref{Appendix: distribution on manifold}, to conclude the proof of this theorem it suffices to show that
\begin{align}\label{Eq: new claim}
\phi^\prime_*(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}}F)=(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}^\prime}F)^{\phi^\prime(U^\prime)}\,,\qquad\mathrm{in}\quad\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi^\prime(U^\prime))\,.
\end{align}
To this end, there exists a family of local charts $\{(U_i,\phi_i)\}_{i\in I}\subset\mathcal{A}$, for some index set $I$, such that $U^\prime=\cup_{i\in I}(U^\prime\cap U_i)=\vcentcolon\cup_{i\in I}U^\prime_i$, with $U^\prime_i\vcentcolon=U^\prime\cap U_i$.
We consider the restriction of Equation \eqref{Eq: new claim} to a subset $U^\prime_i$.
Recalling that coherence is stable with respect to restrictions, entailing by uniqueness $(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}^\prime}F)^{\phi^\prime(U^\prime)}|_{\phi^\prime(U^\prime_i)}=(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}^\prime}F)^{\phi^\prime(U^\prime_i)}$, we prove that, for any $i\in I$,
\begin{align}\label{Eq: latest claim}
\phi^\prime_*(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}}F|_{U^\prime_i})=(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}^\prime}F)^{\phi^\prime(U^\prime_i)}\,.
\end{align}
Via a partition of unity argument, this yields Equation \eqref{Eq: new claim}. For any compact set $K\subset U^\prime_i$ and for any $h\in\mathcal{D}(\phi^\prime(U^\prime_i))$, it holds, uniformly on $p\in K$ and $\lambda\in(0,1]$,
\begin{align}\label{Eq: check of coherence}
|(\phi^\prime_*(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}}F|_{U^\prime_i})-\phi_*^\prime(F_p))(&h_{\phi^\prime(p)}^\lambda)|\nonumber\\
\lesssim&\,|(\phi_{i*}(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}}F|_{U^\prime_i})-\phi_{i*}(F_p))((\phi^\prime\circ\phi_i^{-1})^*h)_{\phi(p)}^\lambda|\lesssim\lambda^\gamma\,,
\end{align}
where in the first inequality we performed a change of coordinates whereas in the last inequality we exploited that $\mathcal{R}_\mathcal{A}F$ reconstructs $F$ with respect to the atlas $\mathcal{A}$.
Finally, we recall that on account of Theorem \ref{Thm: reconstruction} and of $\gamma>0$, $(\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}^\prime}F)^{\phi^\prime(U^\prime_i)}$ is the unique distribution satisfying Equation \eqref{Eq: check of coherence}.
Hence, Equation \eqref{Eq: latest claim} holds true by uniqueness.
This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}

Eventually, we discuss the reconstruction theorem for the case of $\gamma$-coherent germs of distributions with $\gamma\leq0$.
\begin{theorem}\label{Rmk: gamma<0}
Let $M$ be a $d$-dimensional smooth manifold and let $\mathcal{A}=\{(U_j,\phi_j)\}_{j\in J}$ be an atlas over $M$, with $J$ index set. Let $\gamma\leq0$ and let $F=(F_p)_{p\in M}$ be a $\gamma$-coherent germ of distributions on $(M,\mathcal{A})$. There exists a distribution $\mathcal{R}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ such that, for any $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$, $\phi_*(\mathcal{R}F)\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi(U))$ and it satisfies, for any compact set $K\subset U$ and for any $h\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq: reconstruction for gamma le0}
|(\phi_*(\mathcal{R}F)-\phi_*(F_p))(h_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|\lesssim
\begin{cases}
\lambda^\gamma\qquad\mathrm{if}\;\gamma<0\,,\\
1+|\log\lambda|\qquad\mathrm{if}\;\gamma=0\,,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
uniformly for $p\in K$ and $\lambda\in(0,1]$. This distribution $\mathcal{R}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ is non-unique.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof of this theorem is similar in spirit to that of Theorem \ref{Thm: reconstruction} and it uses a localized version of the same result of \cite{CZ20}. As a consequence, we only sketch  the proof. Moreover, we only discuss the case $\gamma<0$, the proof of the case $\gamma=0$ being analogous. As a consequence of \cite[Thm. 4.4]{CZ20}, for any $(U,\phi)\in\mathcal{A}$ there exists a distribution $(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi(U))$ such that, for any compact set $K\subset U$ and for any $h\in\mathcal{D}(\phi(U))$
\begin{align}
|((\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi(U)}-\phi_*(F_p))(h_{\phi(p)}^\lambda)|\lesssim\lambda^\gamma\,,
\end{align}
uniformly for $p\in K$ and for $\lambda\in(0,1]$.
Notice that, since $\gamma<0$, this distribution is non-unique.
Nonetheless, we can choose for any $(U_j,\phi_j)\in\mathcal{A}$ a reconstructed local distribution $(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi_j(U_j)}\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi_j(U_j))$.
We can now introduce a partition of unity $\{\rho_j\}_{j\in J}$ subordinated to the covering $\{U_j\}_{j\in J}$ of the manifold $M$.
In this way, similarly to \cite[Sect. 11]{CZ20}, one can construct a global reconstructed distribution $\mathcal{R}_{\mathcal{A}, \rho}\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(M)$ satisfying the bound of Equation \eqref{Eq: reconstruction for gamma le0}.
We underline that this distribution is non-unique. Indeed, it depends on the the choice of the local reconstructed distributions $(\mathcal{R}F)^{\phi_j(U_j)}\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\phi_j(U_j))$, on the atlas $\mathcal{A}$ and on the partition of unity $\{\rho_j\}_{j\in J}$.
 The dependence on the partition of unity is a consequence of the lack of the overlapping condition, \textit{cf}. Equation \eqref{Eq: overlapping condition} \cite[Thm. 1.4.3]{FJ99}.
\end{proof}

\begin{comment}
\begin{remark}
In Theorem \ref{Thm: coherence wrt different atlases} we assumed that the germ $F=\{F_p\}_{p\in M}$ on the manifold $M$ was $\gamma$-coherent with respect to both atlases $(M,\mathcal{A})$ and $(M,\mathcal{A}^\prime)$ with the same parameter $\gamma>0$.
This assumption is non-restrictive. Indeed, if a germ $F=\{F_p\}_{p\in M}$ is $\gamma$-coherent with respect to $(M,\mathcal{A})$ and $\gamma^\prime$-coherent with respect to $(M,\mathcal{A}^\prime)$, with $\gamma^\prime\geq\gamma>0$, then it is $\gamma$-coherent also with respect to $(M,\mathcal{A}^\prime)$.
This can be seen in the following way: let $(U^\prime,\phi^\prime)\in\mathcal{A}^\prime$ be a local chart and let $K^\prime\subset U^\prime$ be a compact set.
By $\gamma^\prime$-coherence, there exists $\alpha^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}\leq\min\{\gamma^\prime,0\}$ such that, for any $r > -\alpha^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}$,
\begin{align}\label{Eq: generic reference}
|(\phi^\prime_\ast(F_p)-\phi^\prime_\ast(F_q))(h^\lambda_{\phi^\prime(q)})|\lesssim \|h\|_{C^r} \lambda^{\alpha^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}}(|\phi^\prime(q)-\phi^\prime(p)|+\lambda)^{\gamma^\prime-\alpha^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}}\,,
\end{align}
holds uniformly for $p,q\in K^\prime$, $\lambda\in (0,1]$ and $h\in\mathcal{D}(B(0,1))$. Being the right-hand side of Equation \eqref{Eq: generic reference} non-increasing in $\alpha^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}$, we can decrease it, if necessary, to a value $\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}\leq \alpha^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}$ such that $\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}\leq\min\{\gamma,0\}$ while retaining the inequality
\begin{align*}
|(\phi^\prime_\ast(F_p)-\phi^\prime_\ast(F_q))(h^\lambda_{\phi^\prime(q)})|\lesssim \|h\|_{C^r} \lambda^{\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}}(|\phi^\prime(q)-\phi^\prime(p)|+\lambda)^{\gamma^\prime-\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}}\,.
\end{align*}
Moreover,
\begin{align*}
\lambda^{\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}}(|\phi^\prime(q)-\phi^\prime(p)|+\lambda)^{\gamma^\prime-\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}} &= \lambda^{\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}}(|\phi^\prime(q)-\phi^\prime(p)|+\lambda)^{\gamma^\prime - \gamma} (|\phi^\prime(q)-\phi^\prime(p)|+\lambda)^{\gamma -\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}} \nonumber \\
&\leq \lambda^{\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}}(\operatorname{Diam(\phi^\prime(K^\prime))}+1)^{\gamma^\prime - \gamma} (|\phi^\prime(q)-\phi^\prime(p)|+\lambda)^{\gamma -\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}} \\
&\lesssim \lambda^{\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}}(|\phi^\prime(q)-\phi^\prime(p)|+\lambda)^{\gamma -\tilde{\alpha}^{U^\prime}_{K^\prime}}\,. \nonumber
\end{align*}
Thus, for any $r > - \tilde{\alpha}_{K^\prime}$,
\[
|(\phi^\prime_\ast(F_p)-\phi^\prime_\ast(F_q))(h^\lambda_{\phi^\prime(q)})|\lesssim \|h\|_{C^r} \lambda^{\tilde{\alpha}_{K^\prime}}(|\phi^\prime(q)-\phi^\prime(p)|+\lambda)^{\gamma -\tilde{\alpha}_{K^\prime}}
\]
holds uniformly for $p,q\in K^\prime$, $\lambda \in (0,1]$ and $h\in\mathcal{D}(B(0,1))$, \textit{i.e.}, $F$ is $\gamma$-coherent on $(M,\mathcal{A}^\prime)$. \\
Observe that here we used that if a germ of distributions is $\gamma^\prime$-coherent with respect to $(M,\mathcal{A}^\prime)$, then it is also $\gamma$-coherent with respect to $(M,\mathcal{A}^\prime)$ for any $\gamma\leq\gamma^\prime$.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}\label{Rmk: different atlases}
Theorem \ref{Thm: coherence wrt different atlases} shows that, whenever a germ of distributions is $\gamma$-coherent, then its reconstruction is independent of the atlas used in its construction. \\
Moreover, since the notion of coherence is stable with respect to restriction, \textit{cf}. Remark \ref{Rmk: coherence is stable wrt restriction}, and since it is independent of the coordinates, \textit{cf}. Proposition \ref{Proposition: independence on charts}, whenever a germ is coherent with respect to an atlas $(M,\mathcal{A})$, then it is such also with respect to any other atlas $\mathcal{A}^\prime$ whose covering is a refinement\footnote{We say that an atlas $\mathcal{A}^\prime=\{(U_j^\prime,\phi^\prime_j)\}_{j\in J}$ has a covering which is refinement of the one of the atlas $\mathcal{A}=\{(U_i,\phi_i)\}_{i\in I}$ if for any $j\in J$ there exists $i_j\in I$ such that $U^\prime_j\subset U_{i_j}$.} of $\mathcal{A}$.\\
As an example, for a given $\gamma>0$, consider a $\gamma$-coherent germ $F=\{F_x\}_{x\in\mathbb{R}^d}$on the Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^d$.
Notice that the notion of $\gamma$-coherence of \cite{CZ20} on the Euclidean space is equivalent to our notion of $\gamma$-coherence with respect to the trivial atlas $\mathcal{A}=(\mathbb{R}^d,\mathrm{id})$.
The previous argument implies that, setting $\mathcal{R}F\in\mathcal{D}^\prime(\mathbb{R}^d)$ to be the unique reconstruction of the germ $F$, for any open set $U\subset\mathbb{R}^d$, it holds $(\mathcal{R}F)|_U=\mathcal{R}(F|_U)$ in the sense of $\mathcal{D}^\prime(U)$.
\end{remark}
\end{comment}


\section{Introduction}

The main mysteries in cosmology are related strongly to the
accelerating eras of our Universe, namely the inflationary era and
the dark energy era of our Universe. Both these two eras are
currently under theoretical and observational investigation, and
to date, no concrete model exists that describes these two eras,
although many viable candidate theories appear in the literature.
With regard to inflation, from the observational point of view,
the latest Planck data \cite{Akrami:2018odb} have put strong
constraints on the observational indices of inflation, however, to
date there is no sign for the presence of $B$-modes (curl), which
would definitely verify the occurrence of an inflationary era. It
is useful to note that the B-mode polarization is due to two
reasons, firstly from primordial tensor perturbations on large
angular scales (so at low multipoles of the Cosmic Microwave
Background $l \leq 10$), or at late times due to gravitational
lensing conversion of E-modes to B-modes which occur for small
angular scales \cite{Denissenya:2018mqs}. However, not only
inflationary theories lead to a primordial tensor perturbations
spectrum, but also alternatives to inflation do, which typically
produce more B-mode polarization (the exception being the initial
version of the Ekpyrotic scenario). With regard to the dark energy
era, this was firstly observed in the late 90's
\cite{Riess:1998cb}, based on observations of Type IA supernovas
which are white dwarfs standard candles. However, to date, only
constraints on several physical quantities related to dark energy
are obtained, and although many candidate theories can potentially
describe the dark energy era, no definitive answer is given for
the question what is the nature of dark energy. Also we need to
note that there exist studies in the literature that the dark
energy era can be combined with a viable bouncing era
\cite{Odintsov:2020vjb}, with the bouncing cosmology scenario
being an interesting alternative to the inflationary scenario the
bouncing cosmology scenario
\cite{Brandenberger:2012zb,Brandenberger:2016vhg,Battefeld:2014uga,Novello:2008ra,Cai:2014bea,deHaro:2015wda,Lehners:2011kr,Lehners:2008vx,Cheung:2016wik,Cai:2016hea}.

For inflation, the usual description uses the inflaton scalar
field
\cite{Linde:2007fr,Gorbunov:2011zzc,Lyth:1998xn,Martin:2018ycu},
and from a string theory point of view, scalar fields seem to play
a prominent role in nature. In fact, the Standard Model of
particle physics is built upon the Higgs scalar which gives mass
to all massive particles. On the other hand, since inflation is
marginally chronically near to the quantum gravity era, it is
possible that higher order curvature terms might appear in the
inflationary Lagrangian. Modified gravity theory, describes such
models that contain higher order curvature terms or even string
motivated terms
\cite{reviews1,reviews2,reviews3,reviews4,reviews5,reviews6}, and
is known to describe inflation and dark energy under the same
theoretical framework, with the unification of inflation and dark
energy being firstly proposed in Ref. \cite{Nojiri:2003ft}, and
later further developed in Refs.
\cite{Nojiri:2007as,Nojiri:2007cq,Cognola:2007zu,Nojiri:2006gh,Appleby:2007vb,Elizalde:2010ts,Odintsov:2020nwm}.
Motivated by this, in this paper we shall consider a class of
exponential models of $f(R)$ gravity, firstly considered in Ref.
\cite{Oikonomou:2020qah}, in the presence of a canonical scalar
field with scalar potential. The effective Lagrangian during the
large curvature regime which is realized during the inflationary
era, at leading order becomes that of a pure canonical scalar
field in the presence of a rescaled Einstein-Hilbert term of the
form $\sim \alpha R$, with $\alpha$ being a dimensionless
constant. The resulting rescaled Einstein-Hilbert theory can alter
the phenomenology of several known inflationary models, however,
in a positive way, since the phenomenological viability of the
models also occurs for the rescaled theory. However, the attribute
of this rescaled theory is that all the swampland criteria might
be satisfied for the same set of free parameter values which
render the inflationary theory phenomenologically viable. The
Swampland conjectures, firstly appeared in Refs.
\cite{Vafa:2005ui,Ooguri:2006in} and were further studied in Refs.
\cite{Palti:2020qlc,Mizuno:2019bxy,Brandenberger:2020oav,Blumenhagen:2019vgj,Wang:2019eym,Benetti:2019smr,Palti:2019pca,Cai:2018ebs,Akrami:2018ylq,Mizuno:2019pcm,Aragam:2019khr,Brahma:2019mdd,Mukhopadhyay:2019cai,Brahma:2019kch,Haque:2019prw,Heckman:2019dsj,Acharya:2018deu,Elizalde:2018dvw,Cheong:2018udx,Heckman:2018mxl,Kinney:2018nny,Garg:2018reu,Lin:2018rnx,Park:2018fuj,Olguin-Tejo:2018pfq,Fukuda:2018haz,Wang:2018kly,Ooguri:2018wrx,Matsui:2018xwa,Obied:2018sgi,Agrawal:2018own,Murayama:2018lie,Marsh:2018kub,Storm:2020gtv,Trivedi:2020wxf,Sharma:2020wba,Odintsov:2020zkl,Mohammadi:2020twg,Trivedi:2020xlh,Han:2018yrk,Achucarro:2018vey,Akrami:2020zfz},
see also \cite{Colgain:2018wgk,Colgain:2019joh,Banerjee:2020xcn}
for the $H_0$ tension problem relation with the Swampland
criteria. Impose some restrictions in scalar theories, since the
slow-roll conditions might be incompatible with the Swampland
criteria. In our case, the $\alpha$-rescaled theory might lead to
both the phenomenological inflationary viability of the scalar
models and at the same time the theory is compatible with the
Swampland criteria. This result is based on an initial $f(R)$
gravity theory which at leading order in the high curvature
regime, yields the rescaled Einstein-Hilbert term. In order to
exemplify our claims, we study two well-known models of inflation,
fibre inflation \cite{Stewart:1994ts,Cicoli:2008gp} and a
supergravity $\alpha$-attractor model \cite{Carrasco:2015rva}. As
we demonstrate, both the models yield a viable inflationary
phenomenology and are also compatible with the Swampland criteria,
for the same set of values of the free parameters that render the
inflationary theory viable.

Apart from the inflationary era, we also discuss the dark energy
era of the combined $f(R)$ scalar field model. We choose the fibre
inflation model in the presence of the full $f(R)$ gravity, to
quantify our study, and by reexpressing the Friedmann equation in
terms of the redshift and of a suitable dark energy statefinder
quantity, we numerically solve the resulting Friedmann equation.
As we demonstrate, the model is compatible with the Planck data on
the cosmological parameters for some physical quantities of great
phenomenological interest, and also when statefinders are
considered, the model resembles the behavior of the
$\Lambda$-Cold-Dark-Matter ($\Lambda$CDM) model. An interesting
feature of the model is that at late-times the dark energy era is
not free from dark energy oscillations. This result is intriguing,
since a similar exponential $f(R)$ gravity model does not yield
dark energy oscillations at late times. Thus we conclude that the
dark energy oscillations feature is somewhat model dependent.

\section{The $f(R)$ Gravity Scalar Field Model, Inflationary Effective Theory and the Swampland Criteria}

The $f(R)$ gravity scalar field model action has the following
form,
\begin{equation}
\label{action} \centering
\mathcal{S}=\int{d^4x\sqrt{-g}\left(\frac{f(R)}{2\kappa^2}-\frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu\phi\partial^\mu\phi-V(\phi)\right)}\,
,
\end{equation}
with $\kappa=\frac{1}{M_p}$ and $M_P$ denotes is the reduced
Planck mass. The $f(R)$ gravity will be assumed to have the form,
\begin{equation}\label{frini}
f(R)=R-\gamma  \lambda  \Lambda -\lambda  R \exp
\left(-\frac{\gamma  \Lambda }{R}\right)-\frac{\Lambda
\left(\frac{R}{m_s^2}\right)^{\delta }}{\zeta }\, ,
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda$ will be assumed to take values of the order of the
cosmological constant at present time, so it has dimensions
eV$^2$, while the parameter $m_s$ is defined to be
$m_s^2=\frac{\kappa^2\rho_m^{(0)}}{3}$, with $\rho_m^{(0)}$ being
the energy density of cold dark matter at present day. Also, the
parameters $\lambda$, $\gamma$, $\delta$ and $\zeta$ are
dimensionless parameters to be defined during the inflationary
era. The only constraint we assume on the value of $\delta$ is
$\delta<0.01$ in order for this term to be subleading during the
inflationary era. In fact the motivation for adding this term comes
from the dark energy era study, in order to produce more smooth
results.

By assuming a flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) metric,
\begin{equation}
\label{metric} \centering
ds^2=-dt^2+a(t)^2\sum_{i=1}^{3}{(dx^{i})^2}\, ,
\end{equation}
the field equations for the theory (\ref{action}) are,
\begin{equation}
\label{motion1} \centering
3H^2f_R=\frac{Rf_R-f}{2}-3H\dot{f}_R+\kappa^2\left(
\frac{1}{2}\dot\phi^2+V\right)\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{motion2} \centering -2\dot
Hf_R=\kappa^2\dot\phi^2+\ddot{f}_R-H\dot{f}_R\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{motion3} \centering \ddot{\phi}+3H\dot{\phi}+V'=0\, .
\end{equation}
where $f_R=\frac{d f}{d R}$. Let us consider how the $f(R)$
gravity model is approximated during the early-time era, and since
the curvature even for the low-scale inflation is of the order
$\sim H_I^2$, with $H_I\sim 10^{13}$GeV, this means that during
the inflationary era, the curvature satisfies $R\gg \Lambda
\gamma$. Thus the exponential term in the $f(R)$ gravity of Eq.
(\ref{frini}) during the large curvature regime can be
approximated as follows,
\begin{equation}\label{expapprox}
\lambda  R \exp \left(-\frac{\gamma  \Lambda }{R}\right)\simeq
-\gamma \lambda  \Lambda -\frac{\gamma ^3 \lambda \Lambda^3}{6
R^2}+\frac{\gamma ^2 \lambda  \Lambda ^2}{2 R}+\lambda  R\, ,
\end{equation}
thus the effective action during the inflationary era is at
leading order in $R$,
\begin{equation}\label{effectiveaction}
\mathcal{S}=\int
d^4x\sqrt{-g}\left(\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\left(\alpha R+ \frac{\gamma
^3 \lambda \Lambda ^3}{6 R^2}-\frac{\gamma ^2 \lambda \Lambda
^2}{2 R}-\frac{\Lambda}{\zeta
}\left(\frac{R}{m_s^2}\right)^{\delta
}+\mathcal{O}(1/R^3)+...\right)-\frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu\phi\partial^\mu\phi-V(\phi)\right)\,
,
\end{equation}
where we have set $\alpha=1-\lambda$. Thus by taking into account
that the parameter $\delta$ satisfies $\delta<0.01$, the effective
action corresponding to the large curvature regime of the action
(\ref{action}) is basically a rescaled Einstein-Hilbert canonical
scalar field theory. It is notable that the rescaled
Einstein-Hilbert theory is a Jordan frame theory, the Einstein
frame counterpart of which would contain two scalar fields, thus
the action (\ref{effectiveaction}) is an effective theory in
Jordan frame, and being such we cannot make the correspondence
with the Einstein frame, because we should take into account the
other $F(R)$ gravity terms into account.

Let us now consider the phenomenology of the rescaled
Einstein-Hilbert scalar model of Eq. (\ref{effectiveaction}).
Firstly, for the effective action (\ref{effectiveaction}), the
field equations of the effective theory (\ref{effectiveaction}) at
leading order read,
\begin{equation}
\label{motion1a} \centering 3H^2\alpha\simeq \kappa^2\left(
\frac{1}{2}\dot\phi^2+V\right)\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{motion2a} \centering -2\dot H\alpha\simeq
\kappa^2\dot\phi^2\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{motion3a} \centering \ddot{\phi}+3H\dot{\phi}+V'=0\, .
\end{equation}
The slow-roll indices for the above theory are defined as follows,
\cite{Hwang:2005hb},
\begin{align}\label{slowrollindicesdef}
& \epsilon_1=-\frac{\dot H}{H^2}, \\ \notag &
\epsilon_2=\frac{\ddot\phi}{H\dot\phi},
\end{align}
and the spectral index of the primordial curvature scalar
perturbations is,
\begin{equation}\label{spectralindexdef}
n_s=1-4 \epsilon_1-2\epsilon_2\, .
\end{equation}
Let us calculate in detail the two slow-roll indices by taking
into account the slow-roll assumptions $\ddot{\phi}\ll H
\dot{\phi}$, and $\frac{\dot{\phi}^2}{2}\ll V$, hence the scalar
field equation reads,
\begin{equation}
\label{motion3appr} \centering 3H\dot{\phi}+V'\simeq 0\, ,
\end{equation}
while the Friedmann equation reads,
\begin{equation}
\label{motion1appr} \centering 3H^2\alpha\simeq \kappa^2V\, ,
\end{equation}
thus, the first slow-roll index $\epsilon_1$ in view of Eqs.
(\ref{motion3appr}) and (\ref{motion1appr}) becomes,
\begin{equation}\label{firstslowrollapproxi}
\epsilon_1=\frac{\alpha}{2\kappa^2}\left(\frac{V'}{V}
\right)^2=\alpha \epsilon\, ,
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon$ is the usual first slow-roll index of the
canonical scalar theory
\begin{equation}\label{slowrollcanonical}
\epsilon=\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\left(\frac{V'}{V} \right)^2\, .
\end{equation}
In addition, the second slow-roll index $\epsilon_2$ is formally
written,
\begin{equation}\label{secondslowrollapproxi}
\epsilon_2=\frac{\ddot{\phi}}{H\dot{\phi}}\simeq
\partial_t\left(-\frac{V'}{3H}\right)/(H\dot{\phi})\simeq -\alpha \eta+\epsilon_1\, ,
\end{equation}
where $\eta$ is the second slow-roll index for the canonical
scalar theory, defined as,
\begin{equation}\label{secondslowrollindex}
\eta=\frac{1}{\kappa^2}\frac{V''}{V}\, .
\end{equation}
In view of Eqs. (\ref{firstslowrollapproxi}) and
(\ref{secondslowrollapproxi}), the spectral index
(\ref{spectralindexdef}) reads,
\begin{equation}\label{spectralindexfinal}
n_s\simeq 1-6\alpha \epsilon+2\alpha \eta\, ,
\end{equation}
thus the difference with the canonical Einstein-Hilbert theory is
the presence of the parameter $\alpha$. Let us now turn our focus
to the tensor-to-scalar ratio, which is defined as follows
\cite{reviews1},
\begin{equation}\label{tensordef}
r=\frac{8\kappa^2Q_s}{f_R}\, ,
\end{equation}
with $Q_s=\frac{\dot{\phi}^2}{H^2}$. By using the Raychaudhuri
equation (\ref{motion2a}) we have
$Q_s=-\frac{2\dot{H}\alpha}{\kappa^2H^2}$, hence the resulting
expression for the tensor to scalar ratio is,
\begin{equation}\label{final}
r\simeq 16 \epsilon_1=16 \alpha \epsilon\, .
\end{equation}
Let us now investigate how the $e$-foldings number becomes in
terms of the scalar field. We have,
\begin{equation}\label{efoldingsnew}
N=\int_{t_i}^{t_f}H
dt=\frac{\kappa^2}{\alpha}\int_{\phi_f}^{\phi_i}\frac{V}{V'}
d\phi\, .
\end{equation}
By using the expressions (\ref{spectralindexfinal}), (\ref{final})
and (\ref{efoldingsnew}), one may study the inflationary
phenomenology following the well known procedure for scalar field
inflation. The final value of the scalar field at the end of
inflation is calculated by solving the condition
$\epsilon_1(\phi_f)=1$ with respect to the scalar field, and thus
by integrating (\ref{efoldingsnew}) one may determine the value of
the scalar field at the first horizon crossing, namely $\phi_i$.
Accordingly, by calculating $n_s$ and $r$ for the value of the
scalar field at the first horizon crossing, one may have analytic
expressions for both $n_s$ and $r$ as functions of the
$e$-foldings and the free parameters of the scalar field model. In
the following we shall use the above formalism in order to examine
the phenomenological viability of two scalar field models. Before
proceeding to this, let us recall the Swampland criteria
\cite{Vafa:2005ui,Ooguri:2006in,Palti:2020qlc,Mizuno:2019bxy,Brandenberger:2020oav,Blumenhagen:2019vgj,Wang:2019eym,Benetti:2019smr,Palti:2019pca,Cai:2018ebs,Akrami:2018ylq,Mizuno:2019pcm,Aragam:2019khr,Brahma:2019mdd,Mukhopadhyay:2019cai,Brahma:2019kch,Haque:2019prw,Heckman:2019dsj,Acharya:2018deu,Elizalde:2018dvw,Cheong:2018udx,Heckman:2018mxl,Kinney:2018nny,Garg:2018reu,Lin:2018rnx,Park:2018fuj,Olguin-Tejo:2018pfq,Fukuda:2018haz,Wang:2018kly,Ooguri:2018wrx,Matsui:2018xwa,Obied:2018sgi,Agrawal:2018own,Murayama:2018lie,Marsh:2018kub,Storm:2020gtv,Trivedi:2020wxf,Sharma:2020wba,Odintsov:2020zkl,Mohammadi:2020twg,Trivedi:2020xlh,Colgain:2018wgk,Colgain:2019joh,Banerjee:2020xcn},
which are the following assuming reduced Planck units
($\kappa^2=1$),
\begin{enumerate}
    \item $\Delta \phi \leq d$, with $d\sim \mathcal{O}(1)$ in
    reduced Planck units.
    \item $\Big{|}\frac{V'}{V} \Big{|}\geq \gamma$, with $\gamma\sim \mathcal{O}(1)$ in
    reduced Planck units.
    \item $-\frac{V''}{V}\geq 1$
\end{enumerate}
The Swampland criteria for the normal Einstein-Hilbert canonical
scalar theory is the fact that the first slow-roll index must
satisfy,
\begin{equation}\label{firstswampclass}
\Big{|}\frac{V'}{V} \Big{|}=\sqrt{2\epsilon}\geq 1\, ,
\end{equation}
hence the tensor-to-scalar ratio of the ordinary canonical scalar
theory, which is $r=16\epsilon$, must be larger than unity in
reduced Planck units, so this puts the inflationary phenomenology
of scalar models in peril. In addition, the spectral index of the
ordinary canonical scalar theory would be $n_s=1-6\epsilon+2\eta$,
so if $\epsilon\sim \mathcal{O}(1)$, it might be difficult to
obtain a nearly scale invariant spectrum with $n_s\sim
\mathcal{O}(1)$.

Let us discuss how the rescaled Einstein-Hilbert scalar theory
offers a possible remedy for the Swampland issues of the pure
scalar theory, and at the same time, a viable phenomenology may be
obtained by the same theory. In the rescaled Einstein-Hilbert
gravity, the slow-roll conditions for the slow-roll indices are
quantified not by the conditions $\epsilon\ll 1$ and $\eta \ll 1$,
but by the conditions $\epsilon_1\ll 1$ and $\epsilon_2\ll 1$.
Hence, it is obvious that the Swampland conditions can be
satisfied even if $\epsilon\sim \mathcal{O}(1)$, since it is
possible to achieve $\epsilon_1\ll 1$ and $\epsilon_2\ll 1$, by
choosing the parameter $\alpha$ to be small enough in order to
guarantee that the Swampland inequalities are satisfied. To be
more precise, due to the fact that $\epsilon_1=\alpha \epsilon$
even if $\epsilon>1$, if we choose $\alpha$ appropriately, we can
achieve $r=16\alpha \epsilon \ll 1$. Also the spectral index in
the rescaled Einstein-Hilbert gravity is $n_s=1-6 \alpha
\epsilon+2\alpha \eta$, can be very close to unity and compatible
with the Planck data, if the parameter $\alpha$ is appropriately
chosen. Thus in principle it is possible to realize a viable
slow-roll inflationary era, and at the same time to satisfy the
Swampland criteria for the rescaled Einstein-Hilbert gravity
framework. We shall explicitly demonstrate this in the next
section, by using two well-known inflationary models.

Before proceeding, an important comment is in order regarding the
whole $a$-rescaled theoretical framework. On a nutshell, the
effect is seen only at the equation of motion level, and not at
the initial action (\ref{action}), which is used in order to
extract the Swampland criteria. In fact the effective action
(\ref{effectiveaction}) is a virtual action, not a true action
describing the system. It is a virtual action which may produce
the slow-roll equations of motion at leading order. To be
specific, the scalar field present in the initial action, is some
remnant of an effectively massless mode at Planck scale, which
gained mass when the original M-theory was compactified in four
dimensions. The Swampland criteria and the corresponding de Sitter
condition applies to the original 11-dimensional M-theory or even
the 10-dimensional supersymmetric M-theory. This de Sitter
condition is violated at Planck scale, but it is satisfied at the
compactification scale, and during the inflationary era, where
$\phi\sim \mathcal{O}(1)$ in reduced Planck units. The de Sitter
criterion then should constrain the pre-inflationary era and the
inflationary era itself. Our approach in this paper however, is
mainly based on leading order approximations during the slow-roll
era at the equations of motion level. We assume that the starting
action (\ref{action}) is the action for which the Swampland
criteria apply. The rescaled action (\ref{effectiveaction}) is a
virtual effective action which corresponds to the leading order
simplification of the equations of motion, assuming also a
slow-roll evolution. This virtual effective action is the action
that can describe the dynamical evolution of the cosmological
system at leading order, at the level of equations of motion. The
action that would directly extract the slow-roll leading order
equations of motion. Thus the Swampland criteria are not derived
by this effective action, which as we mentioned is a virtual
action, not a real action. Hence, the de Sitter Swampland
criterion derived by the initial action does not contain the
parameter $a$, which enters virtually only the equations of
motion, when leading order curvature terms are kept and in
addition the slow-roll conditions apply. This is similar to the
effect of the slow-roll approximation itself, one could derive an
effective action which could result to the slow-roll approximated
equations of motion, but this effective action by no means is not
the original action of the cosmological system, it is just a
virtual action. Thus, the de Sitter condition constrains directly
$\nabla V/V$, and via the equations of motion this de Sitter
condition can be satisfied. The original action constrains $\nabla
V/V\geq 1$ in reduced Planck units, and for a single scalar field
theory, this would mean that the first slow-roll index
$\epsilon_1=-\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}$, which under the slow-roll
approximation becomes
$\epsilon_1=\frac{1}{2\kappa^2}\left(\frac{V'}{V} \right)^2$ would
have a direct problem due to the fact that the Swampland de Sitter
criterion implies $V'/V\geq 1$. However, in our case, he original
action (\ref{action}) indicates that $V'/V\geq 1$, however at the
equations of motion level, the first slow-roll index $\epsilon_1$
under the slow-roll approximation and by keeping leading order
curvature terms is explicitly,
\begin{equation}\label{newslowroll}
\epsilon_1=-\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}\simeq
\frac{\alpha}{2\kappa^2}\left(\frac{V'}{V} \right)^2\, .
\end{equation}
This is the new feature of our framework, the Swampland criterion
is not affected since it applies to the original action
(\ref{action}), or even the Einstein frame transformed one, where
two scalar fields would be present, and although $V'/V$ is
constrained, the first slow-roll index of the theory is not
affected, since it is given by
$\epsilon_1=-\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}\simeq
\frac{\alpha}{2\kappa^2}\left(\frac{V'}{V} \right)^2$. Thus the
parameter $a$ does not enter the de Sitter Swampland condition.
Hence dynamically, at the equations of motion level, the Swampland
de Sitter condition does not affect the slow-roll dynamics of the
theory, for the rescaled theory we developed, due to the presence
of the parameter $a$. In the single scalar field case, the de
Sitter condition destroys the slow-roll era. In the rescaled
theory we developed, the slow-roll condition is not affected at
all by the Swampland condition. Hence, our approach is generated
by the Jordan frame slow-roll dynamics by keeping leading order
curvature terms. The main result of our works thus, is that the de
Sitter Swampland criterion does not directly affect the slow-roll
condition that the slow-roll index $\epsilon_1$ must satisfy, due
to the presence of the parameter $a$. This is an  equation of
motion effect, generated by the slow-roll conditions and by
keeping leading order curvature terms, and it is not related to
any modified action. The action (\ref{effectiveaction}) is a
virtual action that would generate the equations of motion after
the slow-roll conditions are imposed and if leading order
curvature terms are kept. It is a fictitious virtual action, not a
true action for the system, thus the Swampland criteria are not
derived by it, but from the initial action (\ref{action}).

\section{Inflationary Phenomenology and Swampland Criteria for a Supergravity $\alpha$-Attractor Model}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot2.eps}
\caption{Contour plots for the spectral index of primordial scalar
curvature perturbations $n_s$ (left plot) and the tensor-to-scalar
ratio $r$ (right plot), for $\beta=[0.01,0.05]$,
$\alpha=[0,0.006]$ and $N=60$.}\label{plot1}
\end{figure}
Let us start our quantitative study of inflation for the rescaled
Einstein-Hilbert gravity, by analyzing a supergravity
$\alpha$-attractor model, for which the scalar potential is
\cite{Carrasco:2015rva},
\begin{equation}\label{attractor}
V(\phi)=V_0^4 \left(1-e^{-\sqrt{\frac{2}{3 \beta }} \kappa  \phi
}\right)^2\, ,
\end{equation}
where $V_0$ is a constant with mass dimensions $[V_0]=m$ and
$\beta$ is a dimensionless constant. The slow-roll index
$\epsilon_1$ is easily found,
\begin{equation}\label{epsilonalphaatr}
\epsilon_1=\frac{4 \alpha }{3 \beta  \left(e^{\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}
\sqrt{\frac{1}{\beta }} \kappa  \phi }-1\right)^2}\, ,
\end{equation}
and by solving the equation $\epsilon_1(\phi_f)=1$, we obtain the
value of the scalar field at the end of the inflationary era,
which is,
\begin{equation}\label{phifinal1}
\phi_f=\frac{\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}} \log \left(\frac{2 \sqrt{3}
\sqrt{\alpha }+3 \sqrt{\beta }}{3 \sqrt{\beta
}}\right)}{\sqrt{\frac{1}{\beta }} \kappa }\, .
\end{equation}
Accordingly, by integrating (\ref{efoldingsnew}), we obtain the
value of the scalar field at first horizon crossing,
\begin{equation}\label{phii1}
\phi_i=\frac{\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}} \log \left(\frac{2 \sqrt{3}
\sqrt{\alpha } \sqrt{\beta }+3 \beta +4 \alpha  N}{3 \beta
}\right)}{\sqrt{\frac{1}{\beta }} \kappa }\, .
\end{equation}
Hence, the spectral index of the primordial scalar curvature
perturbations, and the tensor-to-scalar ratio can be evaluated at
leading order in $1/N$, and these are,
\begin{equation}\label{nsalphaattractor}
n_s\simeq 1-\frac{2}{N}+\frac{\sqrt{3} \sqrt{\beta }}{\sqrt{\alpha
} N^2}-\frac{3 \beta }{\alpha  N^2}\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{tensoralphaattr}
r\simeq \frac{12 \beta }{\alpha  N^2}\, .
\end{equation}
The phenomenological viability of the model can be achieved for a
large range of the free parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$, for
$N\sim 60$, however we shall choose both $\alpha$ and $\beta$ in
such a way so both the inflationary phenomenology viability and
the compliance with the Swampland conjectures is simultaneously
achieved. In Fig. \ref{plot1} we present the contour plots for the
spectral index of primordial scalar curvature perturbations values
(left plot) and the tensor-to-scalar ratio (right plot), for
$\beta=[0.01,0.05]$ and $\alpha=[0,0.006]$ and $N=60$. Recall that
the latest Planck constraints indicate that \cite{Akrami:2018odb},
\begin{equation}\label{planck1}
n_{s} = 0.9649 \pm 0.0042, \,\,\, r < 0.056 \, ,
\end{equation}
so in both the plots of Fig. \ref{plot1}, we kept values in the
plot range that satisfy the latest Planck constraints, that is
$n_s=[0.9607, 0.9691]$ and $r=[0,0.056]$. As it can be seen, the
simultaneous compatibility of both the spectral index $n_s$ and of
the tensor-to-scalar ratio $r$ is achieved for this range of
values of $\alpha$ and $\beta$. A numerical example would also be
useful here, so for $\alpha=0.004$ and $\beta=0.02$ and for
$N=60$, we get $n_s=0.963576$ and $r=0.0166667$, which are of
course compatible with the latest Planck data (\ref{planck1}). Now
let us turn our focus on the Swampland criteria, and in Fig.
\ref{plot2} we plotted the contour plots of
$\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$ (left plot) and of
$-\frac{V''(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$ (right plot), evaluated at the first
horizon crossing (which is the relevant value of the scalar field
for inflationary phenomenology) for the same range of values of
the free parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$, that is for,
$\beta=[0.01,0.05]$ and $\alpha=[0,0.006]$ and for $N=60$, in
reduced Planck units. In the left plot we kept the plot values of
$\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$ to be in the range
$\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}=[1,9]$ while for
$\frac{V''(\phi)}{V(\phi)}=[1,13]$, so both the quantities
$\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$ and of $-\frac{V''(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$
take values well above unity in reduced Planck units.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot4.eps}
\caption{Second and third Swampland criteria analysis. Contour
plots of $\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$ (left plot) and of
$-\frac{V''(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$ (right plot), evaluated at the first
horizon crossing for the ranges of values of the free parameters,
$\beta=[0.01,0.05]$ and $\alpha=[0,0.006]$ and for $N=60$, in
reduced Planck units.}\label{plot2}
\end{figure}
Hence, for the $\alpha$-attractor $E$-model, the last two
Swampland criteria are satisfied. Finally, let us note that for
all the analysis performed above, we assumed that the first
Swampland criterion marginally holds true, so during inflation,
the scalar field takes values $\Delta \phi \sim M_p$, or $\Delta
\phi \sim 1$ in reduced Planck units.

\section{Inflationary Phenomenology and Swampland Criteria for a Fibre Inflation Model}

Let us now consider another model of phenomenological interest,
which is related to several string theory models
\cite{Stewart:1994ts,Cicoli:2008gp}, and is known as a class of
fibre inflation, in which case the potential is,
\begin{equation}\label{fibre}
V(\phi)=V_0^4 (1-\exp (-\lambda \kappa  \phi ))\, ,
\end{equation}
where again the constant $V_0$ has mass dimensions $[V_0]=[m]$ and
$\lambda$ is a dimensionless constant. In this case the slow-roll
index $\epsilon_1$ is,
\begin{equation}\label{epsilonalphaatr}
\epsilon_1=\frac{\alpha  \lambda ^2 e^{-2 \kappa  \lambda  \phi
}}{2 \left(1-e^{-\kappa  \lambda  \phi }\right)^2}\, ,
\end{equation}
and again by solving the equation $\epsilon_1(\phi_f)=1$, we
obtain $\phi_f$,
\begin{equation}\label{phifinal1}
\phi_f=\frac{\log \left(\frac{1}{2} \left(2-\sqrt{2} \sqrt{\alpha
} \lambda \right)\right)}{\kappa  \lambda }\, .
\end{equation}
Accordingly, by integrating (\ref{efoldingsnew}), we get $\phi_i$,
\begin{equation}\label{phii1}
\phi_i=\frac{\log \left(\frac{1}{2} \left(\sqrt{2} \sqrt{\alpha }
\lambda +2 \alpha  \lambda ^2 N+2\right)\right)}{\kappa  \lambda
}\, .
\end{equation}
Hence, the spectral index of the primordial scalar curvature
perturbations, and the tensor-to-scalar ratio at leading order in
$1/N$  are,
\begin{equation}\label{nsalphaattractor}
n_s\simeq 1-\frac{2}{N} -\frac{3}{\alpha  \lambda ^2
N^2}+\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{\alpha } \lambda  N^2}\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{tensoralphaattr}
r\simeq \frac{8}{\alpha  \lambda ^2 N^2}\, .
\end{equation}
In this case too, the model has good inflationary phenomenological
properties, and the viability can be achieved for a large range of
the free parameters $\alpha$ and $\lambda$, for $N\sim 60$.
However, as in the previous paradigm, we shall choose $\alpha$ and
$\lambda$ in such a way so that both the Swampland criteria are
satisfied and the inflationary phenomenology of the model is
guaranteed.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot6.eps}
\caption{Contour plots for the spectral index of primordial scalar
curvature perturbations $n_s$ (left plot) and the tensor-to-scalar
ratio $r$ (right plot), for $\lambda=[35,60]$ and
$\alpha=[0.00003, 0.0001]$ and for $N=60$.}\label{plot3}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{plot3} we present the contour plots for the spectral
index of primordial scalar curvature perturbations values (left
plot) and the tensor-to-scalar ratio (right plot), for
$\lambda=[35,60]$ and $\alpha=[0.00003, 0.0001]$ and $N=60$, and
in both the plots of Fig. \ref{plot3}, we kept values in the plot
range that satisfy the latest Planck constraints, that is
$n_s=[0.9607, 0.9691]$ and $r=[0,0.056]$. As it can be seen, for
this model too, the simultaneous compatibility of both the
spectral index $n_s$ and of the tensor-to-scalar ratio $r$ is
achieved. Now let us turn our focus on the Swampland criteria, and
in Fig. \ref{plot4} we present the results of our numerical
analysis. Particularly, the left contour plot corresponds to the
values of $\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$, and also the right contour
plots corresponds to the values of $-\frac{V''(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$,
evaluated at the first horizon crossing for $\lambda=[35,60]$ and
$\alpha=[0.00003, 0.0001]$ and $N=60$. In the left plot we kept
the plot values of $\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$  in the range
$\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}=[1,9]$ while for
$\frac{V''(\phi)}{V(\phi)}=[100,500]$, so both the quantities
$\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$ and of $-\frac{V''(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$
take values well above unity in reduced Planck units, especially
$-\frac{V''(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$ takes quite large values for the same
set of free parameters values .
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot7.eps}
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot8.eps}
\caption{Second and third Swampland criteria analysis for the
Fibre inflation model. Contour plots of $\frac{V'(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$
(left plot) and of $-\frac{V''(\phi)}{V(\phi)}$ (right plot),
evaluated at the first horizon crossing for the ranges of values
of the free parameters $\alpha$ and $\lambda$, $\lambda=[35,60]$
and $\alpha=[0.00003, 0.0001]$ and for $N=60$, in reduced Planck
units.}\label{plot4}
\end{figure}
Hence, in this case too, the last two Swampland criteria are
satisfied and also we assumed that $\Delta \phi \sim M_p$, or
$\Delta \phi \sim 1$ in reduced Planck units for the whole
analysis.

\subsection{Dark Energy Evolution for the $f(R)$ Gravity Model with
Fibre Inflation Potential}

The motivation for studying the exponential $f(R)$ gravity models,
was mainly the interesting late-time phenomenology these generate,
as is the case in Ref. \cite{Oikonomou:2020qah}, where the
unification of inflation with the late-time era was obtained. In
this work, we shall also consider the late-time phenomenology of
the model (\ref{action}) with the $f(R)$ gravity model being that
of Eq. (\ref{frini}) and the scalar potential of the fibre
inflation, namely that of Eq. (\ref{fibre}), in the presence of
cold dark matter and of radiation perfect fluids. The model of
this work and the one studied in Ref. \cite{Oikonomou:2020qah} are
different in their functional form, but have similarities,
however, in the present paper the inflationary era is controlled
by a canonical scalar field, while in the model of Ref.
\cite{Oikonomou:2020qah}, the early-time era was controlled by an
$R^2$ term, and the axion scalar was frozen in its primordial
vacuum expectation value. Let us now study the late-time behavior
of the $f(R)$ gravity canonical scalar field theory. To this end,
instead of the cosmic time we shall express all the dynamically
evolving quantities as functions of the redshift,
\begin{equation}
\centering \label{z} 1+z=\frac{1}{a(t)}\, ,
\end{equation}
and also we shall make extensive use of the following
differentiation rule,
\begin{equation}
\centering \label{dz} \frac{d}{dt}=-H(1+z)\frac{d}{dz}\, .
\end{equation}
More importantly, we shall express all the Hubble rate dependent
terms and their derivatives, as functions of the statefinder
function $y_H(z)$ and its derivatives
\cite{Hu:2007nk,Bamba:2012qi,Odintsov:2020qyw,Odintsov:2020nwm},
\begin{equation}
\centering \label{yH} y_H=\frac{\rho_{DE}}{\rho_m^{(0)}}\, ,
\end{equation}
with $\rho_{DE}$ standing for the dark matter energy density and
with $\rho_m^{(0)}$ being the current value of density for
non-relativistic matter. The forms of the dark energy density and
of the dark energy pressure can be derived by the field equations
corresponding to the action (\ref{action}),
\begin{equation}
\centering \label{DEdensity}
\rho_{DE}=\frac{1}{2}\dot\phi^2+V+\frac{f_R
R-f}{2\kappa^2}-\frac{3H\dot f_R}{\kappa^2}+\frac{3H^2}{\kappa^2}(1-f_R)\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\centering \label{PDE} P_{DE}=-V-\frac{f_R
R-f}{2\kappa^2}-\frac{2\dot H}{\kappa^2}(1-f_R)\, .
\end{equation}
The field equations can be cast in their Einstein-Hilbert form for
a FRW metric,
\begin{equation}
\centering \label{motion6}
\frac{3H^2}{\kappa^2}=\rho_{(m)}+\rho_{DE}\, ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\centering \label{motion7} -\frac{2\dot
H}{\kappa^2}=\rho_{(m)}+P_{(m)}+\rho_{DE}+P_{DE}\, ,
\end{equation}
where $\rho_{(m)}$ and $P_{(m)}$ are the energy density and the
pressure of the matter perfect fluids that are present, which we
shall assume that these are the radiation and cold-dark-matter
fluids. Hence, the Hubble rate can be written as a function of the
statefinder as follows,
\begin{equation}
\centering \label{H}
H^2=m_s^2\left(y_H(z)+\frac{\rho_{(m)}}{\rho_m^{(0)}}\right)\, ,
\end{equation}
where
$m_s^2=\kappa^2\frac{\rho_m^{(0)}}{3}=1.87101\cdot10^{-67}$eV$^2$.
We shall solve numerically the field equations in the redshift
interval $z=[0,10]$, by assuming the following initial conditions,
\begin{equation}\label{generalinitialconditions}
y_H(z_f)=\frac{\Lambda}{3m_s^2}\left(
1+\frac{(1+z_f)}{1000}\right)\, , \,\,\,\frac{d y_H(z)}{d
z}\Big{|}_{z=z_f}=\frac{1}{1000}\frac{\Lambda}{3m_s^2}\, ,
\end{equation}
for the function $y_H(z)$, where $z_f=10$, while for the scalar
field, the initial conditions are chosen as,
\begin{equation}\label{scalarfieldinitial}
\phi(z_f)=10^{-16}M_p,\,\,\, \phi'(z_f)=-10^{-7}M_p\, .
\end{equation}
As for the free parameters and the various physical parameters, we
shall assume that the Hubble rate at present time is $H_0\simeq
1.37187\times 10^{-33}$eV according to the latest Planck data
\cite{Aghanim:2018eyx}. In addition, $\Omega_{\Lambda}\simeq
0.681369$ and $\Omega_M\sim 0.3153$ \cite{Aghanim:2018eyx}, while
$\Omega_r/\Omega_M\simeq \chi$. Also for the numerical analysis of
the model (\ref{frini}), we shall choose $\gamma=6$, $\zeta=0.23$
$\delta=0.01$ and $\lambda=0.001$. In addition,
$m_s^2=\frac{\kappa^2\rho^{(0)}_m}{3}=H_0\Omega_c=1.37201\times
10^{-67}$eV$^2$, and $\Lambda$ is assumed to be equal to the
present time cosmological constant, while $V_0$ appearing in Eq.
(\ref{fibre}) is chosen to be $V_0=\Lambda^4$. In Fig. \ref{plot5}
we present the statefinder $y_H(z)$ as a function of the redshift
(left plot) and the dark energy EoS parameter as a function of the
redshift (right plot).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot9.eps}
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot10.eps}
\caption{The statefinder function $y_H$ for geometric dark energy
as a function of the redshift (left plot), and the dark energy EoS
parameter $\omega_{DE}$ (right plot).}\label{plot5}
\end{figure}
It is apparent that the dark energy oscillations are present even
in this scalar $f(R)$ gravity model, while in the model of Ref.
\cite{Oikonomou:2020qah}, dark energy oscillations were absent.
Hence it seems that the dark energy oscillations seem to be a
model dependent feature of modified gravity models. In order to
have a concrete quantitative idea of how viable is the model under
study, let us calculate the dark energy equation of state (EoS)
parameter $\omega_{DE}$, and the dark energy density parameter
$\Omega_{DE}$ at present time, for the model under study. In terms
of $y_H$, the aforementioned quantities are defined as
\cite{Bamba:2012qi,Odintsov:2020qyw,Odintsov:2020nwm},
\begin{align}
\centering \label{DE}
\omega_{DE}&=-1+\frac{1+z}{3}\frac{d\ln{y_H}}{dz}&\Omega_{DE}&=\frac{y_H}{y_H+\frac{\rho_{(m)}}{\rho_m^{(0)}}}\,
,
\end{align}
so our numerical analysis yielded the following values,
\begin{equation}
\centering \label{DE}
\omega_{DE}(0)=-0.996093,\,\,\,\Omega_{DE}(0)=0.688719\, ,
\end{equation}
which are compatible with the latest Planck constraints on the
cosmological parameters \cite{Aghanim:2018eyx}, which indicate
that $\omega_{DE}=-1.018\pm 0.031$, and $\Omega_{DE}=0.6847\pm
0.0073$. Finally, it is worth to compare in brief the present
model with the $\Lambda$CDM model, so let us consider a
statefinder quantity in order to reveal the resemblance of the
$\Lambda$CDM model with the fibre $f(R)$ gravity model. We shall
consider the deceleration parameter,
\begin{align}\label{statefinders}
& q=-1-\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}=-1+(z+1)\frac{H'(z)}{H(z)}\, ,
\end{align}
and in Fig. \ref{plot6} we present the deceleration parameter for
the fibre $f(R)$ model (blue curve), with the $\Lambda$CDM
deceleration parameter (red curve). As it can be seen in Fig.
\ref{plot6} the two models are indistinguishable for $z<4$. Also
at present day, the deceleration parameter for the fibre $f(R)$
gravity model is $q(0)=-0.528993$, while the $\Lambda$CDM value is
$q=-0.527$, which are quite similar values.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=18pc]{plot11.eps}
\caption{The deceleration parameter, as a function of the redshift
for the fibre $f(R)$ gravity model (blue curve) and for the
$\Lambda$CDM model (red curve).} \label{plot6}
\end{figure}
Finally, our numerical analysis indicated that the initial
condition of the scalar field at $z=z_f$ does not affect
significantly the late-time qualitative behavior, however, the
initial condition of the derivative of the scalar field with
respect to the redshift variable, affects significantly the
late-time behavior.

In conclusion, we demonstrated that the $f(R)$ gravity scalar
field model with fibre inflation potential, can describe in an
unified way both the inflationary era and the dark energy era,
producing results which are both compatible with the 2018 Planck
constraints on inflation \cite{Akrami:2018odb} and with the 2018
Planck constraints on the cosmological parameters
\cite{Aghanim:2018eyx}. At the same time the model formally
satisfies the Swampland criteria, for the same set of values of
the free parameters that yield the inflationary viability of the
model. The new result that the fibre $f(R)$ gravity model brings
along is that the early-time era is essentially governed by a
rescaled Einstein-Hilbert canonical scalar theory, and the rest of
the $f(R)$ terms affect only the late-time era. The presence of a
rescaled Ricci scalar term is a solid effect of modified gravity,
which affects the inflationary effective Lagrangian at large
curvatures.

Finally it is worthy discussing which term affects the most the
dark energy era, is it the $f(R)$ gravity or the scalar field. The
answer to this question can be given only qualitatively, and it
seems that only $f(R)$ gravity drives the late-time era. The only
effect of the scalar field is that it mainly affects the dark
energy oscillations, which, in the absence of the scalar field and
for the class of $f(R)$ models studied in this paper, are absent,
see for example Ref. \cite{Oikonomou:2020qah}. Also the viability
of the model is obtained for different values of the exponent of
the power-law $f(R)$ gravity term. Thus the scalar model changes
the behavior of the dark energy era in a qualitative way since it
changes the parameter range for which viability can occur, and
also it re-introduces oscillations in the class of models studied
in the present paper, which were absent in the scalar field free
theory of Ref. \cite{Oikonomou:2020qah}.

\section{Conclusions}

In this work we presented a model of $f(R)$ gravity in the
presence of a canonical scalar field, and we investigated a
unification of inflation with dark energy scenario. The $f(R)$
gravity was chosen to be of exponential type with power-law
corrections with their exponent being less than unity and
positive. During the large curvature era, the $f(R)$ gravity at
leading order became a rescaled type of Einstein-Hilbert gravity,
with the dominant term being of the form $\alpha R$, with $\alpha$
being a dimensionless constant. Thus the effective Lagrangian
during the inflationary era was that of a rescaled
Einstein-Hilbert canonical scalar theory. For the inflationary era
we investigated the phenomenologically viability of the resulting
theory and also we examined whether it was possible to comply with
the Swampland criteria. As we showed, this is possible for the
resulting theory, if the first Swampland criterion holds
marginally true, that is, if the scalar field during the
inflationary era is of the order $\phi\sim M_p$. We exemplified
our study by using two characteristic inflationary potentials, one
supergravity related $\alpha$-attractors model, and one fibre
inflation model. After examining carefully the parameter space of
the two models, we showed that the phenomenologically viability of
the models is easy to achieve, and also we demonstrated that for
the same set of values for the free parameters that guarantee the
inflationary viability of the models, the models became compatible
with the Swampland criteria. Finally, we addressed the question
whether it is possible to describe the inflationary and the dark
energy era within this theoretical framework of $f(R)$ canonical
scalar theory. By investigating the fibre inflationary potential
at late times, using a numerical approach, we demonstrated that
the $f(R)$ scalar theory can produce a viable dark energy, which
is compatible with the latest 2018 Planck data and mimics the
$\Lambda$CDM model, when statefinder quantities are considered. A
notable feature characterizing the dark energy era, is the
presence of dark energy oscillations, and by taking into account
the results of Ref. \cite{Oikonomou:2020qah}, we may reach the
conclusion that the dark energy oscillations feature is a model
depended feature in modified gravity dark energy models.