Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Distinguishing between $\Lambda$CDM and modified gravity with future observations of cosmic growth rate

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1512.09077 v1 pith:WOYKH6T3 submitted 2015-12-30 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-phhep-th

classification astro-ph.COgr-qchep-phhep-th
keywords modelgrowthrategravitylambdacosmicmodifiedomega
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
abstract

A probability of distinguishing between $\Lambda$CDM model and modified gravity is studied by using the future observations for the growth rate of cosmic structure (Euclid redshift survey). Adopting extended DGP model, Kinetic Gravity Braiding model, and Galileon model as modified gravity, we compare predicted cosmic growth rate by models to the mock observational data. The growth rate $f\sigma_8$ in the original DGP model is suppressed compared with the $\Lambda$CDM case, for the same value of the current density parameter of matter $\Omega_{m,0}$, because of the suppression of effective gravitational constant. In case of the kinetic gravity braiding model and the Galileon model, the growth rate $f\sigma_8$ is enhanced compared with the $\Lambda$CDM case, for the same value of $\Omega_{m,0}$, because of the enhancement of effective gravitational constant. For future observational data of the cosmic growth rate (Euclid), compatible value of $\Omega_{m,0}$ are different by models, furthermore $\Omega_{m,0}$ can be stringently constrained. Thus, we find the $\Lambda$CDM model is distinguishable from modified gravity by combining the growth rate data of the Euclid with other observations.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Is $\omega_0 \omega_a$CDM a good model for the clumpy Universe?

    astro-ph.CO 2025-07 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    Against a Gaussian-process reconstruction of 15 sigma8(z) measurements, the DESI w0waCDM model fits slightly better than LambdaCDM, but the difference is tiny and the comparison metric is biased.

Pith tools