pith. sign in

arxiv: 2510.04179 · v3 · submitted 2025-10-05 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Crosschecking Cosmic Distances from DESI BAO and DES SNe

Mauricio Lopez-Hernandez , Eoin \'O Colg\'ain , Saeed Pourojaghi , M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 10:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords DESI BAODES supernovaecosmic distancesdistance dualitymodel-agnostic reconstructionfrequentist methodsredshift binsconsistency check
0
0 comments X

The pith

Supernova distances reconstructed from DES match DESI BAO distances at three effective redshifts.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper performs a consistency check between two independent cosmic distance measures by taking DES supernova data and reconstructing the transverse comoving distance and Hubble distance in redshift bins that match the effective redshifts of DESI DR2 BAO measurements. They divide the distances by the sound horizon scale using a Planck prior and compare the results directly to the BAO constraints. Mock tests reveal that frequentist methods recover the input distances without bias while Bayesian MCMC methods introduce systematic offsets. The reconstructed values agree well overall, with the ratio of transverse distances across bins staying flat as expected from distance duality, though the Hubble distance ratio shows a mild drop whose significance drops when using frequentist methods or updated supernova catalogs.

Core claim

Reconstructing D_M/r_d and D_H/r_d from DES SNe in effective redshift bins matching DESI DR2 BAO using a Planck r_d prior produces values consistent with the BAO constraints. The ratios of the three D_M/r_d measurements are consistent with a constant, confirming the distance duality relation holds up to calibration, while the D_H/r_d ratio decreases with a significance that ranges from 2.5 sigma in Bayesian methods to 1.4 sigma in frequentist methods. Mock analysis shows frequentist reconstructions are unbiased whereas MCMC ones are not. Replacing DES SNe with DES-Dovekie data lowers the significance further, and the lowest-redshift D_M/r_d favors DESI BAO over transversal BAO.

What carries the argument

Local model-agnostic reconstruction of comoving and Hubble distances from supernova data in effective redshift bins matched to BAO measurements, performed with frequentist methods shown unbiased by mocks.

If this is right

  • The distance duality relation holds across the studied redshifts up to overall calibration.
  • Frequentist methods yield unbiased local distance reconstructions from SNe while Bayesian MCMC methods do not.
  • The lowest-redshift D_M/r_d measurement favors DESI BAO constraints over transversal BAO.
  • Switching to updated supernova catalogs such as DES-Dovekie reduces the apparent trend in the Hubble distance ratio.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the agreement persists in future data releases, combined supernova and BAO analyses can tighten expansion history constraints with reduced risk of probe-specific systematics.
  • The method-dependent difference in trend significance suggests that any future tension between these probes should be checked against both frequentist and Bayesian reconstructions.
  • A remaining mild drop in the Hubble distance ratio could motivate targeted tests for redshift-dependent calibration offsets between the two datasets.

Load-bearing premise

The mock catalogs used to test the reconstruction methods accurately reflect the statistical properties and any hidden systematics in the real DES supernova and DESI BAO data.

What would settle it

An independent supernova catalog or higher-precision BAO survey at the same effective redshifts yielding statistically significant disagreement in the reconstructed D_M/r_d or D_H/r_d values would falsify the reported consistency.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.04179 by Eoin \'O Colg\'ain, Mauricio Lopez-Hernandez, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Saeed Pourojaghi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Redshift distributions for Pantheon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Ratio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The ratio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We perform a consistency check of DESI DR2 BAO constraints ($D_M/r_d, D_H/r_d)$ by reconstructing the same quantities from DES supernovae (SNe) in bins with the same effective redshift $z_{\textrm{eff}} \in \{ 0.510, 0.706, 0.934 \}$ and a Planck $r_d$ prior. Through mock analysis we show that $D_M(z_{\rm eff})$ and $D_{H}(z_{\rm eff})$ can be locally reconstructed model agnostically from $\Lambda$CDM and extended models, but only if one employs frequentist methods; purely Bayesian reconstructions from Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) exhibit bias. We find that the ratio of the three $D_M/r_d$ values at different $z_{\textrm{eff}}$ are consistent with a horizontal, thus confirming that the distance duality relation holds up to calibration. However, the $D_H/r_d$ ratio shows a decreasing trend driven by the $z_{\textrm{eff}} = 0.934$ bin, the significance of which varies from $2.5 \sigma$ with Bayesian methods down to $1.4 \sigma$ with frequentist methods. We show that replacing DES with DES-Dovekie SNe reduces the significance to $1.7 \sigma$ and $1.2 \sigma$ in Bayesian and frequentist approaches, respectively. We conclude that distances reconstructed from SNe show good agreement with DESI BAO distances across the redshifts studied. We also note that $D_M(z_{\rm eff} = 0.510)/r_d$ reconstructed from SNe favours DESI BAO over transversal BAO against a backdrop of a $3.7 \sigma$ disagreement.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that DES supernovae can be used to reconstruct DM/rd and DH/rd in effective-redshift bins matching DESI DR2 BAO measurements (z_eff = 0.510, 0.706, 0.934) with a Planck rd prior. Mock analyses are used to establish that frequentist reconstructions are unbiased while Bayesian MCMC reconstructions exhibit bias. The DM/rd ratios are found consistent with a constant (supporting distance duality), while DH/rd shows a decreasing trend whose significance drops from 2.5σ (Bayesian) to 1.4σ (frequentist); replacing DES with DES-Dovekie SNe further reduces the trend. The paper concludes that SNe-reconstructed distances show good agreement with DESI BAO distances overall and that the z_eff=0.510 DM/rd value favors DESI over transversal BAO.

Significance. If the mock validation of frequentist unbiasedness transfers to the real data, the work supplies a useful model-agnostic cross-check between two independent distance probes and illustrates the practical importance of reconstruction methodology. The explicit frequentist-versus-Bayesian comparison and the use of mocks to diagnose bias constitute clear strengths that would be valuable to the community if the mocks are shown to be sufficiently faithful.

major comments (1)
  1. The central claim of good agreement between SNe-reconstructed and DESI BAO distances (abstract and conclusion) rests on the assertion that frequentist reconstructions are unbiased, as diagnosed from the mock analysis. The manuscript must demonstrate that the mocks faithfully reproduce the real DES SNe covariance matrix, calibration uncertainties, redshift distributions, and any systematics introduced by effective-redshift binning; without such verification the bias diagnosis does not necessarily carry over to the actual data, rendering the reported 1.4σ DH/rd trend and the overall consistency conclusion unreliable.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract provides only limited detail on the precise reconstruction procedure, data cuts, and error propagation; a short additional sentence or reference to the relevant methods subsection would improve accessibility.
  2. The phrasing 'good agreement' in the conclusion could be qualified by explicitly noting the 1.4σ trend in DH/rd and the method dependence of its significance.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We address the major comment point by point below, providing the strongest honest response possible while committing to revisions where appropriate to strengthen the work.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim of good agreement between SNe-reconstructed and DESI BAO distances (abstract and conclusion) rests on the assertion that frequentist reconstructions are unbiased, as diagnosed from the mock analysis. The manuscript must demonstrate that the mocks faithfully reproduce the real DES SNe covariance matrix, calibration uncertainties, redshift distributions, and any systematics introduced by effective-redshift binning; without such verification the bias diagnosis does not necessarily carry over to the actual data, rendering the reported 1.4σ DH/rd trend and the overall consistency conclusion unreliable.

    Authors: We agree that explicit verification of mock fidelity is essential to support the transfer of the bias diagnosis from mocks to real data. Our mocks are constructed by sampling from the published DES SNe covariance matrix, adopting the observed redshift distribution of the DES sample, and incorporating calibration uncertainties through the same Planck r_d prior used in the data analysis. The effective-redshift binning procedure is applied identically to mocks and data. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that a dedicated side-by-side comparison was not presented in sufficient detail. We will revise the manuscript by adding an appendix that (i) tabulates and plots the mock versus real covariance matrices and redshift histograms, (ii) quantifies residual differences in calibration propagation, and (iii) discusses any additional systematics arising from the effective-redshift binning choice. These additions will directly address the referee’s concern and reinforce the reliability of the frequentist results and the overall consistency conclusions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained against external benchmarks

full rationale

The paper reconstructs DM/rd and DH/rd from DES SNe in matched effective-redshift bins using an external Planck rd prior, then compares directly to DESI BAO measurements. Mock analysis validates frequentist reconstruction as unbiased on simulated data, but this is a methodological check with stated assumptions rather than a reduction of the data comparison to a fitted input by construction. No self-definitional steps, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation chain. The central consistency claim rests on independent datasets and an external prior, making the analysis self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis depends on an external Planck rd prior and standard-model assumptions used to generate mocks for validating the reconstruction method.

free parameters (1)
  • Planck rd prior
    Sound horizon scale taken from Planck CMB data to normalize supernova-reconstructed distances to the BAO quantities.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Mocks generated under LambdaCDM and extended models faithfully represent the statistical properties of real data for testing reconstruction bias
    Used to demonstrate that frequentist methods avoid bias while Bayesian MCMC does not.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5885 in / 1189 out tokens · 65652 ms · 2026-05-18T10:28:13.653350+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. On the origin of the BAOtr-DESI tension

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 conditional novelty 6.0

    No CMB-consistent CPL dark energy model can simultaneously fit both the BAOtr and DESI datasets; the 3.7-sigma disagreement at z=0.51 sets an irreducible floor.

  2. Model-independent test of the cosmic distance duality relation with recent observational data

    astro-ph.CO 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0

    Two model-independent methods applied to latest SN and BAO data find the cosmic distance duality relation consistent with observations within 1 sigma and no evidence of violation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 25 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    In the Realm of the Hubble tension $-$ a Review of Solutions

    E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Mel- chiorri, D. F. Mota, A. G. Riess, and J. Silk, Class. Quant. Grav. 38, 153001 (2021), arXiv:2103.01183 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  2. [2]

    Challenges for $\Lambda$CDM: An update

    L. Perivolaropoulos and F. Skara, New Astron. Rev.95, 101659 (2022), arXiv:2105.05208 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    Cosmology Intertwined: A Review of the Particle Physics, Astrophysics, and Cosmology Associated with the Cosmological Tensions and Anomalies

    E. Abdallaet al., JHEAp34, 49 (2022), arXiv:2203.06142 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  4. [4]

    The CosmoVerse White Paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics

    E. Di Valentinoet al.(CosmoVerse Network), Phys. Dark Univ. 49, 101965 (2025), arXiv:2504.01669 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    A. G. Riesset al., Astrophys. J. Lett.934, L7 (2022), arXiv:2112.04510 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    W. L. Freedman, Astrophys. J.919, 16 (2021), arXiv:2106.15656 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    D. W. Pesceet al., Astrophys. J. Lett.891, L1 (2020), arXiv:2001.09213 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Kourkchi, R

    E. Kourkchi, R. B. Tully, G. S. Anand, H. M. Courtois, A. Dupuy, J. D. Neill, L. Rizzi, and M. Seibert, Astrophys. J.896, 3 (2020), arXiv:2004.14499 [astro-ph.GA]

    work page arXiv 2020

  9. [9]

    J. P. Blakeslee, J. B. Jensen, C.-P. Ma, P. A. Milne, and J. E. Greene, Astrophys. J.911, 65 (2021), arXiv:2101.02221 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  10. [10]

    S. Li, G. S. Anand, A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. Breuval, L. M. Macri, D. Scolnic, R. Beaton, and R. I. Anderson, Astrophys. J.976, 177 (2024), arXiv:2408.00065 [astro-ph.CO]. 7

    work page arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    A. G. Adameet al.(DESI), JCAP02, 021 (2025), arXiv:2404.03002 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    A. G. Adameet al.(DESI), arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2411.12022 (2024), arXiv:2411.12022 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    DESI DR2 Results II: Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations and Cosmological Constraints

    M. Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), (2025), arXiv:2503.14738 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    T. M. C. Abbottet al.(DES), Astrophys. J. Lett.973, L14 (2024), arXiv:2401.02929 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    Union Through UNITY: Cosmology with 2,000 SNe Using a Unified Bayesian Framework

    D. Rubin, G. Aldering, M. Betoule, A. Fruchter, X. Huang, A. G. Kim, C. Lidman, E. Linder, S. Perlmutter, P. Ruiz- Lapuente, and N. Suzuki, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2311.12098 (2023), arXiv:2311.12098 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    B.-H. Lee, W. Lee, E. ´O Colg´ain, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and S. Thakur, JCAP04, 004 (2022), arXiv:2202.03906 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  17. [17]

    How much has DESI dark energy evolved since DR1?

    E. ´O Colg´ain, S. Pourojaghi, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and L. Yin, (2025), arXiv:2504.04417 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    A. G. Adameet al.(DESI), JCAP09, 008 (2025), arXiv:2411.12021 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    DESI and SNe: Dynamical Dark Energy, Ω m Tension or System- atics?

    E. ´O Colg ´ain and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters542, L24 (2025), arXiv:2412.12905 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    ´O Colg ´ain, S

    E. ´O Colg ´ain, S. Pourojaghi, and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, (2025), arXiv:2505.19029 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

    N. Aghanimet al.(Planck), Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  22. [22]

    The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Power Spectra, Likelihoods and $\Lambda$CDM Parameters

    T. Louiset al.(ACT), (2025), arXiv:2503.14452 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmological Constraints

    D. Broutet al., Astrophys. J.938, 110 (2022), arXiv:2202.04077 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    W. J. Wolf, P. G. Ferreira, and C. Garc ´ıa-Garc´ıa, (2025), arXiv:2509.17586 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Early Cosmology Constrained

    L. Verde, E. Bellini, C. Pigozzo, A. F. Heavens, and R. Jimenez, JCAP04, 023 (2017), arXiv:1611.00376 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    B. R. Dinda, R. Maartens, and C. Clarkson, (2025), arXiv:2509.19899 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Nonparametric Reconstruction of the Dark Energy Equation of State

    T. Holsclaw, U. Alam, B. Sanso, H. Lee, K. Heitmann, S. Habib, and D. Higdon, Phys. Rev. D82, 103502 (2010), arXiv:1009.5443 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  28. [28]

    Nonparametric Dark Energy Reconstruction from Supernova Data

    T. Holsclaw, U. Alam, B. Sanso, H. Lee, K. Heitmann, S. Habib, and D. Higdon, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 241302 (2010), arXiv:1011.3079 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  29. [29]

    Gaussian Process Cosmography

    A. Shafieloo, A. G. Kim, and E. V . Linder, Phys. Rev. D85, 123530 (2012), arXiv:1204.2272 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  30. [30]

    Reconstruction of dark energy and expansion dynamics using Gaussian processes

    M. Seikel, C. Clarkson, and M. Smith, JCAP06, 036 (2012), arXiv:1204.2832 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  31. [31]

    ´O Colg´ ain and M

    E. ´O Colg´ain and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Eur. Phys. J. C81, 892 (2021), arXiv:2101.08565 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  32. [32]

    Favale, A

    A. Favale, A. G ´omez-Valent, and M. Migliaccio, Phys. Lett. B 858, 139027 (2024), arXiv:2405.12142 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  33. [33]

    E. M. Teixeira, W. Giar `e, N. B. Hogg, T. Montandon, A. Poudou, and V . Poulin, (2025), arXiv:2504.10464 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    Afroz and S

    S. Afroz and S. Mukherjee, (2025), arXiv:2504.16868 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Mukherjee and A

    P. Mukherjee and A. A. Sen, Rept. Prog. Phys.88, 098401 (2025), arXiv:2505.19083 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Q. Wang, S. Cao, J. Jiang, K. Zhang, X. Jiang, T. Liu, C. Mu, and D. Cheng, (2025), arXiv:2506.12759 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Zhang, X

    X. Zhang, X. Yang, Y . Ren, S. Chen, Y . Shi, C. Cheng, and X. He, (2025), arXiv:2506.17926 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Dhawan and E

    S. Dhawan and E. M ¨ortsell, (2025), arXiv:2506.22599 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Kanodia, U

    B. Kanodia, U. Upadhyay, and Y . Tiwari, (2025), arXiv:2507.11518 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Li, G.-H

    T.-N. Li, G.-H. Du, P.-J. Wu, J.-Z. Qi, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, (2025), arXiv:2507.13811 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Zheng, D.-C

    J. Zheng, D.-C. Qiang, Z.-Q. You, and D. Kumar, (2025), arXiv:2507.17113 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    A. C. Alfano, C. Cafaro, S. Capozziello, O. Luongo, and M. Muccino, JHEAp49, 100444 (2026), arXiv:2509.09247 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2026

  43. [43]

    Avila, F

    F. Avila, F. Oliveira, C. Franco, M. Lopes, R. Holanda, R. C. Nunes, and A. Bernui, Universe11, 307 (2025), arXiv:2509.07848 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    The Pantheon+ Analysis: The Full Dataset and Light-Curve Release

    D. Scolnicet al., Astrophys. J.938, 113 (2022), arXiv:2112.03863 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  45. [45]

    emcee: The MCMC Hammer

    D. Foreman-Mackey, D. W. Hogg, D. Lang, and J. Good- man, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac.125, 306 (2013), arXiv:1202.3665 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  46. [46]

    ´O Colg´ ain, S

    E. ´O Colg´ain, S. Pourojaghi, and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Eur. Phys. JC 85, 286 (2025), arXiv:2406.06389 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Model-independent cosmological constraints from the CMB

    M. V onlanthen, S. R ¨as¨anen, and R. Durrer, JCAP08, 023 (2010), arXiv:1003.0810 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  48. [48]

    Conservative Constraints on Early Cosmology: an illustration of the Monte Python cosmological parameter inference code

    B. Audren, J. Lesgourgues, K. Benabed, and S. Prunet, JCAP 02, 001 (2013), arXiv:1210.7183 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  49. [49]

    Separate Constraints on Early and Late Cosmology

    B. Audren, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.444, 827 (2014), arXiv:1312.5696 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  50. [50]

    G´ omez-Valent, Phys

    A. G ´omez-Valent, Phys. Rev. D105, 043528 (2022), arXiv:2111.15450 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  51. [51]

    Accelerating Universes with Scaling Dark Matter

    M. Chevallier and D. Polarski, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D10, 213 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0009008

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  52. [52]

    E. V . Linder, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 091301 (2003), arXiv:astro- ph/0208512

    work page arXiv 2003

  53. [53]

    Efstathiou,Evolving Dark Energy or Supernovae Systematics?, arXiv:2408.07175 (2025)

    G. Efstathiou, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.538, 875 (2025), arXiv:2408.07175 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Notari, M

    A. Notari, M. Redi, and A. Tesi, JCAP04, 048 (2025), arXiv:2411.11685 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Huang, R.-G

    L. Huang, R.-G. Cai, and S.-J. Wang, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68, 100413 (2025), arXiv:2502.04212 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Does DESI 2024 confirm ΛCDM?

    E. ´O Colg ´ain, M. G. Dainotti, S. Capozziello, S. Pourojaghi, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and D. Stojkovic, JHEAp49, 100428 (2026), arXiv:2404.08633 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2026

  57. [57]

    Cuceu, H.K

    A. Cuceuet al., (2025), arXiv:2509.15308 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025