Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Revisiting Chaplygin gas cosmologies with the recent observations of high-redshfit quasars

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 2208.06167 v1 pith:LN7RY7KO submitted 2022-08-12 astro-ph.CO

Revisiting Chaplygin gas cosmologies with the recent observations of high-redshfit quasars

classification astro-ph.CO
keywords modelschaplygindatageneralizedlambdangcgquasarsresults
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

In this paper, we use the latest observations of quasars covering the redshift range of $0.04<z<5.1$ to investigate a series of Chaplygin gas models as candidates for unified dark matter and dark energy. Based on different combinations of available standard candle and standard ruler data, we put constraints on the generalized Chaplygin gas (GCG), modified Chaplygin gas (MCG), new generalized Chaplygin gas (NGCG) and viscous generalized Chaplygin gas (VGCG) models. Moreover, we apply Jensen-Shannon divergence (JSD), statefinder diagnostics, and the deviance information criterion (DIC) to distinguish these CG models, based on the statistical results derived from Markov chain Monte Carlo method. The results show that (1) The standard ruler data could provide more stringent constraints on the cosmological parameters of different CG models considered in this analysis. Interestingly, the matter density parameter $\Omega_{m}$ and Hubble constant $H_{0}$ derived from the available data are well consistent with those from the Planck 2018 results; (2) Based on the statistical criteria JSD, our findings demonstrate the well consistency between Chaplygin gas and the concordance $\Lambda$CDM model. However, in the framework of statefinder diagnostics, the GCG and NGCG models cannot be distinguished from $\Lambda$CDM, while MCG and VGCG models show significant deviation from $\Lambda$CDM in the present epoch; (3) According to the the statistical criteria DIC, we show that the MCG and VGCG models have substantial observational support from high-redshfit quasars, whereas the GCG and NGCG models miss out on the less observational support category but can not be ruled out.

discussion (0)

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