Pith. Sign in

RECORD

The oscillating dark energy and cosmological Casimir effect

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
Olesya Gorbunova, Diego Sáez-Gómez

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology · Submitted 28 Sep 2009

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim It is shown explicitly that its role is not essential near to Big Rip singularity.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID0909.5113 (version 2)
Pith IDX3RHSGCR, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationDiego S\'aez-G\'omez, Olesya Gorbunova. "The oscillating dark energy and cosmological Casimir effect." arXiv:0909.5113 (2009). https://pith.science/paper/X3RHSGCR
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,451 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.02 · states limitation 0.60 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.21 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.04 · compares with prior results 0.22 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

The role of dynamical cosmological Casimir effect to phantom (constant $w$) and oscillating Universe is discussed. It is shown explicitly that its role is not essential near to Big Rip singularity. However, the account of Casimir fluid makes the scale factor approach to Rip time to be faster. Rip time itself maybe changed too.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 The role of dynamical cosmological Casimir effect to phantom (constant $w$) and oscillating Universe is discussed. contribution 0.62 0.32 0.09 unclear 0.75
s1 It is shown explicitly that its role is not essential near to Big Rip singularity. result 1.00 0.87 0.52 asserted 1.00
s2 However, the account of Casimir fluid makes the scale factor approach to Rip time to be faster. result 1.00 0.82 0.16 asserted 0.99
s3 Rip time itself maybe changed too. result 0.91 0.62 0.09 hedged possibility 0.95

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.97.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v2
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

The role of dynamical cosmological Casimir effect to phantom (constant $w$) and oscillating Universe is discussed. It is shown explicitly that its role is not essential near to Big Rip singularity. However, the account of Casimir fluid makes the scale factor approach to Rip time to be faster. Rip time itself maybe changed too.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

How the literature uses it

1 arXiv paper cite this in 2 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.