pith. sign in

arxiv: 2406.16503 · v2 · submitted 2024-06-24 · 🌀 gr-qc · astro-ph.CO

Theoretical and observational constraints on early dark energy in F(R) gravity

Hua Chen , Taishi Katsuragawa , Shin'ichi Nojiri , Taotao Qiu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 23:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc astro-ph.CO
keywords early dark energyF(R) gravityHubble tensionequivalence principlemodified gravitydensity ratiobackground cosmology
0
0 comments X

The pith

Potential-driven early dark energy can be realized in F(R) gravity, but equivalence principle violations exclude the viable parameter space at the background level.

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

This paper examines whether early dark energy, introduced to ease the Hubble tension by temporarily supplying roughly ten percent of the total energy density near matter-radiation equality, can be engineered inside F(R) gravity using a potential-driven mechanism. The authors define a dimensionless quantity that makes the density-ratio evolution between the early dark energy component and ordinary matter analytically visible, then apply it to several concrete F(R) examples. They show that the required temporary boost in energy fraction is achievable by suitable choice of the gravity function. At the same time the same choices produce equivalence-principle violations whose size rules out the parameter region that would actually address the tension. The result therefore supplies a general background-level bound on potential-driven early dark energy constructions in F(R) gravity and indicates that nonperturbative or additional mechanisms are needed to preserve compatibility with local tests.

Core claim

The desired early dark energy scenario with an energy fraction of approximately ten percent around redshifts 10^3 to 10^4 can be realized in F(R) gravity for potential-driven models by suitable choice of the function, as shown by the evolution of a dimensionless density-ratio quantity in benchmark cases; however, these constructions lead to equivalence principle violations whose strength excludes the viable parameter space, establishing a generic constraint at the background level.

What carries the argument

dimensionless quantity that tracks the density ratio of early dark energy to other matter components, used to visualize analytic evolution in F(R) models

If this is right

  • The required early dark energy density evolution around matter-radiation equality can be obtained in F(R) gravity by appropriate choice of the function.
  • Equivalence principle violations produced by those F(R) models exclude the parameter space needed to ease the Hubble tension.
  • Nonperturbative effects or nontrivial mechanisms are indispensable to keep early dark energy constructions in F(R) gravity compatible with local gravity tests.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Any future F(R) model built for early dark energy will need extra structure to suppress equivalence-principle violations once perturbations around the background are considered.
  • The same density-ratio tracking approach could be used to derive comparable background constraints in other classes of modified gravity.

Load-bearing premise

A background-level analysis of the density-ratio evolution is sufficient to establish viability without checking that the same F(R) functions satisfy local gravity tests when perturbations are taken into account.

What would settle it

A laboratory or satellite measurement that places the equivalence-principle violation parameter below the value predicted by the benchmark F(R) early dark energy models, or cosmological data that shows the required energy injection without producing such violations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2406.16503 by Hua Chen, Shin'ichi Nojiri, Taishi Katsuragawa, Taotao Qiu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The upper panel shows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The solid black line shows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The upper panel shows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The Einstein-frame potential ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The Einstein-frame potential value ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. The Einstein-frame potential ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. The Einstein-frame potential ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. The Einstein-frame potential ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. The Einstein-frame potential value ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. The cosmic background evolution of matter density (red-dashed line) and the trace of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This work examines an early dark energy (EDE) scenario in the context of $F(R)$ gravity. EDE is introduced to alleviate the Hubble tension by temporarily injecting approximately $10\%$ of the energy fraction around the matter-radiation equality epoch ($z \approx 10^{3}$--$10^{4}$). Building on several benchmark models, we focus on the potential-driven EDE scenario and investigate the conditions required within $F(R)$ gravity. We first introduce a dimensionless quantity to analytically visualize the evolution of the density ratio between EDE and other matter components. Considering several examples, we demonstrate that the desired EDE can indeed be realized in $F(R)$ gravity. However, stringent constraints arising from violations of the equivalence principle could exclude the allowed parameter space. Our result provides a generic constraint on the potential-driven EDE in $F(R)$ gravity at the background level. This work also concludes that nonperturbative effects or nontrivial mechanisms are indispensable for studying EDE in $F(R)$ gravity while maintaining compatibility with local tests of gravity.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines early dark energy (EDE) in F(R) gravity, focusing on potential-driven scenarios. It introduces a dimensionless density-ratio variable to track the evolution of an approximately 10% EDE energy fraction around z ≈ 10³–10⁴ and presents analytic and numeric examples showing that suitable F(R) functions can realize the target background evolution. The paper then asserts that equivalence-principle violations would exclude the resulting parameter space, yielding a generic background-level constraint, and concludes that nonperturbative effects are required for local-gravity compatibility.

Significance. If the central derivation were complete, the work would usefully illustrate how background EDE requirements translate into F(R) parameter choices and would highlight the tension with local tests. The dimensionless density-ratio construction is a clear presentational aid. However, because the exclusion claim is not derived from the specific F(R) models, the significance for constraining EDE in modified gravity remains limited.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and conclusion] Abstract (final paragraph) and concluding section: the statement that 'stringent constraints arising from violations of the equivalence principle could exclude the allowed parameter space' is not supported by any calculation within the manuscript. The background Friedmann analysis and density-ratio evolution do not yield the effective scalar potential, m²(φ), or PPN parameters needed to quantify fifth-force effects for the F(R) functions that realize Ω_EDE ≈ 0.1.
  2. [F(R) examples and EP discussion] Section presenting the F(R) examples and equivalence-principle discussion: the claim that EP violations follow directly from the background solution is inconsistent with standard F(R) analysis, where such violations are controlled by the trace equation and chameleon screening and require either linear perturbation theory or non-perturbative methods; the manuscript itself notes that these methods are 'indispensable' yet performs none of them.
  3. [Conclusion] The generic-constraint conclusion rests on the assumption that any F(R) realizing the target EDE injection necessarily activates an unscreened scalar mode; no explicit mapping from the chosen F(R) forms to the scalar mass or screening radius is provided, rendering the exclusion an external assertion rather than an internal result.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Section introducing the dimensionless quantity] Notation for the dimensionless density ratio should be defined once with an explicit equation number and used consistently thereafter.
  2. A brief comparison table of the benchmark F(R) parameter values versus the resulting Ω_EDE(z) would improve readability of the examples.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We address each major comment below, agreeing where our presentation requires clarification and outlining the revisions we will implement.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and conclusion] Abstract (final paragraph) and concluding section: the statement that 'stringent constraints arising from violations of the equivalence principle could exclude the allowed parameter space' is not supported by any calculation within the manuscript. The background Friedmann analysis and density-ratio evolution do not yield the effective scalar potential, m²(φ), or PPN parameters needed to quantify fifth-force effects for the F(R) functions that realize Ω_EDE ≈ 0.1.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript does not contain explicit calculations of the scalar potential, mass squared, or PPN parameters for the specific F(R) forms. The statement reflects a general property of F(R) gravity, in which deviations from GR introduce a scalar degree of freedom that can mediate fifth forces. To remove ambiguity we will revise the abstract and conclusion to state explicitly that the indicated tension is a background-level expectation and that quantitative assessment of fifth-force effects requires perturbative or non-perturbative analysis of the models we constructed. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [F(R) examples and EP discussion] Section presenting the F(R) examples and equivalence-principle discussion: the claim that EP violations follow directly from the background solution is inconsistent with standard F(R) analysis, where such violations are controlled by the trace equation and chameleon screening and require either linear perturbation theory or non-perturbative methods; the manuscript itself notes that these methods are 'indispensable' yet performs none of them.

    Authors: We accept that a complete treatment of equivalence-principle violations demands the trace equation and screening analysis. Our manuscript already states that non-perturbative methods are indispensable; the background analysis was intended only to show that the target EDE evolution can be realized and to flag the generic tension with local tests. We will add a short paragraph in the examples section that recalls the standard requirements for chameleon screening in F(R) gravity and reiterates that our constraint remains at the background level. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Conclusion] The generic-constraint conclusion rests on the assumption that any F(R) realizing the target EDE injection necessarily activates an unscreened scalar mode; no explicit mapping from the chosen F(R) forms to the scalar mass or screening radius is provided, rendering the exclusion an external assertion rather than an internal result.

    Authors: The generic constraint follows from the fact that any F(R) capable of producing the required EDE density ratio at background level must depart from GR in a manner that, in standard F(R) theory, introduces a light scalar. We supplied explicit F(R) examples but did not compute the associated scalar mass or screening radius. We will revise the conclusion to distinguish clearly between the background-level indication of tension and the model-specific screening calculation that remains to be performed. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; background existence demonstration is independent of target EDE fraction.

full rationale

The paper defines a dimensionless density-ratio variable and uses it to exhibit explicit F(R) examples whose background evolution produces the target ~10% EDE fraction near equality. This is an explicit construction, not a first-principles prediction that reduces to its own inputs. The subsequent statement that EP violations 'could exclude the allowed parameter space' is presented as an external consideration rather than a quantity derived from the same background equations or from a self-citation chain. No self-definitional re-use of the target fraction, no fitted parameter renamed as prediction, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem imported from the authors' prior work appear in the derivation. The central result (that non-perturbative mechanisms are needed for local-test compatibility) therefore stands as an independent observation about the model class.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available, so the ledger is necessarily incomplete. The work assumes standard F(R) field equations and the existence of a potential-driven EDE component whose density ratio can be tracked by a single dimensionless quantity.

free parameters (1)
  • EDE energy fraction (~10%)
    Target value injected around z ~ 10^3-10^4; appears chosen to address Hubble tension rather than derived from first principles.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption F(R) gravity field equations remain valid at background level for the chosen models
    Invoked when demonstrating that desired EDE evolution can be realized.
  • ad hoc to paper Equivalence principle violations can be read off directly from the background solution without perturbation analysis
    Used to conclude that local tests exclude the parameter space.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5727 in / 1458 out tokens · 26555 ms · 2026-05-23T23:37:14.214904+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages · 8 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Likewise, it behaves as an effective cosmological constant for R ≫ R0

    Case 1: fede < 0 We first study the negative EDE (41), which is just the Hu-Sawicki or Starobinsky model of lowest power and with a different curvature scale characterized byR0. Likewise, it behaves as an effective cosmological constant for R ≫ R0. This model was first discussed in Ref. [10] and has been utilized to resolve the Hubble tension [11, 12]. Ho...

    work page

  2. [2]

    We will show that the situation is more severe than the former one

    Case 2: fede > 0 Finally, we turn to the positive EDE (40) with a positive sign. We will show that the situation is more severe than the former one. This model satisfies all stability conditions,F, FR, FR > 0, as long as c1, c3 > 0. Therefore, c1 is less constrained compared with c2 in model (41). We then study the asymptotic behaviors: f+/R0 = c1R2 c3R0R...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Consequently, F (R) is a convex and monotonically increasing function, and FR(R) is a monotonically increasing function

    F (R), FR(R), FRR(R) > 0 for R > R 1, where R1 is the maximal exact de Sitter solution. Consequently, F (R) is a convex and monotonically increasing function, and FR(R) is a monotonically increasing function. The Jordan-frame scalaron field Φ ≡ FR(R) or the Einstein-frame scalaron field φ ≡ √ 6MPl 2 ln FR(R) is also a monotonically increasing function

    work page

  4. [4]

    RFR(R)/F (R) ≃ 1 for the existence of a matter-dominated epoch

    work page

  5. [5]

    A conservative theoretical bound applied to the BBN epoch is (10 /11)2 ≲ FR(RBBN) ≲ (10/9)2

    FR ≃ 1 since today back to reheating when SM particles were created, for not too large variations of the mass of SM particles. A conservative theoretical bound applied to the BBN epoch is (10 /11)2 ≲ FR(RBBN) ≲ (10/9)2. 21

    work page

  6. [6]

    It corresponds to |FR(R) − 1| ≪ 1 for matter density larger than the critical density of the galaxy

    |φatm| < |φgalaxy| < 10−15MPl to pass the experimental bounds from the violation of the equivalence principle. It corresponds to |FR(R) − 1| ≪ 1 for matter density larger than the critical density of the galaxy. We see that the power-law models fail to satisfy the third condition, and the saddle models fail to satisfy either the third or the fourth condit...

    work page

  7. [7]

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

    E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Melchiorri, 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

  8. [8]

    Sch¨ oneberg, G

    N. Sch¨ oneberg, G. Franco Abell´ an, A. P´ erez S´ anchez, S. J. Witte, V. Poulin, and J. Lesgour- gues, Phys. Rept. 984, 1 (2022), arXiv:2107.10291 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  9. [9]

    Early dark energy, the Hubble-parameter tension, and the string axiverse

    T. Karwal and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. D 94, 103523 (2016), arXiv:1608.01309 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  10. [10]

    Cosmological implications of ultra-light axion-like fields

    V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, D. Grin, T. Karwal, and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. D 98, 083525 (2018), arXiv:1806.10608 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  11. [11]

    The Hubble Tension and Early Dark Energy

    M. Kamionkowski and A. G. Riess, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.73, 153 (2023), arXiv:2211.04492 [astro-ph.CO]. 25

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    Karwal, M

    T. Karwal, M. Raveri, B. Jain, J. Khoury, and M. Trodden, Phys. Rev. D 105, 063535 (2022), arXiv:2106.13290 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  13. [13]

    f(R) theories

    A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, Living Rev. Rel. 13, 3 (2010), arXiv:1002.4928 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  14. [14]

    Modified Gravity Theories on a Nutshell: Inflation, Bounce and Late-time Evolution

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Rept. 692, 1 (2017), arXiv:1705.11098 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  15. [15]

    Schiavone, G

    T. Schiavone, G. Montani, and F. Bombacigno, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 522, L72 (2023), arXiv:2211.16737 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    Nojiri, S

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Dark Univ. 29, 100602 (2020), arXiv:1912.13128 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    S. D. Odintsov, D. S´ aez-Chill´ on G´ omez, and G. S. Sharov, Nucl. Phys. B966, 115377 (2021), arXiv:2011.03957 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    S. D. Odintsov, V. K. Oikonomou, and G. S. Sharov, Phys. Lett. B 843, 137988 (2023), arXiv:2305.17513 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    Nojiri, S

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and V. K. Oikonomou, Nucl. Phys. B 980, 115850 (2022), arXiv:2205.11681 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  20. [20]

    M. G. Dainotti, B. De Simone, T. Schiavone, G. Montani, E. Rinaldi, and G. Lambiase, Astrophys. J. 912, 150 (2021), arXiv:2103.02117 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2021

  21. [21]

    M. G. Dainotti, B. De Simone, T. Schiavone, G. Montani, E. Rinaldi, G. Lambiase, M. Bogdan, and S. Ugale, Galaxies 10, 24 (2022), arXiv:2201.09848 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    Solar system and equivalence principle constraints on f(R) gravity by chameleon approach

    S. Capozziello and S. Tsujikawa, Phys. Rev. D 77, 107501 (2008), arXiv:0712.2268 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  23. [23]

    H. Chen, T. Katsuragawa, and S. Matsuzaki, Chin. Phys. C 46, 105106 (2022), arXiv:2206.02130 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    J. G. Lee, E. G. Adelberger, T. S. Cook, S. M. Fleischer, and B. R. Heckel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 101101 (2020), arXiv:2002.11761 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2020

  25. [25]

    P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, A.-C. Davis, J. Khoury, and A. Weltman, Phys. Rev. D 70, 123518 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0408415. 26

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004