REVIEW 13 cited by
Is the $w_0w_a$CDM cosmological parameterization evidence for dark energy dynamics partially caused by the excess smoothing of Planck CMB anisotropy data?
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
abstract
We study the performance of the spatially-flat dynamical dark energy (DE) $w_0w_a$CDM parameterization, with redshift-dependent DE fluid equation of state parameter $w(z) = w_0 + w_a z/(1+z)$, with and without a varying CMB lensing consistency parameter $A_L$, against Planck cosmic microwave background (CMB) data (P18 and lensing) and a combination of non-CMB data composed of baryonic acoustic oscillation (BAO) measurements that do not include DESI BAO data, Pantheon+ type Ia supernovae (SNIa) observations, Hubble parameter [$H(z)$] measurements, and growth factor ($f\sigma_8$) data points. From our most restrictive data set, P18+lensing+non-CMB, for the $w_0w_a$CDM+$A_L$ parameterization, we obtain $w_0=-0.879\pm 0.060$, $w_a=-0.39^{+0.26}_{-0.22}$, the asymptotic limit $w(z\to\infty) = w_0+w_a=-1.27^{+0.20}_{-0.17}$, and $A_L=1.078^{+0.036}_{-0.040}$ (all $1\sigma$ errors). This joint analysis of CMB and non-CMB data favors DE dynamics over a cosmological constant at $\sim 1\sigma$ and $A_L>1$ at $\sim 2\sigma$, i.e. more smoothing of the Planck CMB anisotropy data than is predicted by the best-fit model. For the $w_0w_a$CDM parameterization with $A_L=1$ the evidence in favor of DE dynamics is larger, $\sim 2\sigma$, suggesting that at least part of the evidence for DE dynamics comes from the excess smoothing of the Planck CMB anisotropy data. For the $w_0w_a$CDM parameterization with $A_L=1$, there is a difference of $2.8\sigma$ between P18 and non-CMB cosmological parameter constraints and $2.7\sigma$ between P18+lensing and non-CMB constraints. When $A_L$ is allowed to vary these tensions reduced to $1.9\sigma$ and $2.1\sigma$ respectively. Our P18+lensing+non-CMB data compilation positively favors the $w_0w_a$CDM parameterization without and with a varying $A_L$ parameter over the flat $\Lambda$CDM model, and $w_0w_a$CDM+$A_L$ is also positively favored over $w_0w_a$CDM.
Forward citations
Cited by 13 Pith papers
-
Scalar-Tensor Gravity and DESI 2024 BAO data
With Planck and DESI BAO data, the Brans-Dicke Galileon model prefers a nonzero Galileon term and yields H0 = 71.0 +1.5 -1.3 km/s/Mpc, consistent with SH0ES at 1.2 sigma.
-
Robust Preference for Dark Sector Interactions
Interacting dark matter–dark energy models fit DESI BAO and CMB data as well as evolving-dark-energy (CPL) models, with a coupling preference that persists under DES-Dovekie supernova recalibration.
-
Updated observational constraints on $\phi$CDM dynamical dark energy cosmological models
Updated φCDM constraints from Planck 2018 + non-CMB data find α=0.055±0.041, consistent with a cosmological constant and only mildly favoring evolving quintessence.
-
Robustness of dark energy phenomenology across different parameterizations
The viability of minimally and non-minimally coupled quintessence models is robust across CPL, JBP, BA, and EXP parameterizations, with all four reproducing the models' predicted observables accurately.
-
The DESI DR1/DR2 evidence for dynamical dark energy is biased by low-redshift supernovae
The DESI dynamical dark energy preference drops below 2 sigma after correcting a 0.043 mag intercept discrepancy in the low-redshift supernovae of DESY5.
-
Illustrating the consequences of a misuse of $\sigma_8$ in cosmology
Cosmologists should compare clustering amplitude with the h-independent statistic sigma_12 instead of sigma_8, because sigma_8's smoothing scale shifts with H0 and artificially worsens the growth tension in high-H0 models.
-
Is excess smoothing of Planck CMB ansiotropy data partially responsible for evidence for dark energy dynamics in other $w(z)$CDM parametrizations?
In three new w(z)CDM parametrizations, Planck CMB plus non-CMB data favor evolving dark energy over a cosmological constant at roughly 2 sigma when the Planck lensing anomaly parameter is fixed, and at roughly 1 sigma...
-
Revisiting the equation of state of dark energy from DESI BAO with SNe Ia and CMB
Complementary redshift cuts of DESI BAO DR2, Pantheon+ and CMB distance priors show no robust evidence for w0waCDM over Lambda-CDM, with BIC favoring Lambda-CDM.
-
Observational constraints on early time non-phantom behaviour of dynamical dark energy
Early scaling dark energy is constrained to be less than about one percent at matter-radiation equality and is disfavored by model selection, while late-time CPL dynamics show only a weak preference away from ΛCDM.
-
Constraints on Dark Energy Models Using Late Universe Probes
Using late-universe probes only, the authors find all dark energy models remain within 1-2 sigma of Lambda CDM, which wins the Bayesian model comparison, and confirm that DESI's LRG1 and LRG2 points drive the dynamica...
-
An overview of what current data can (and cannot yet) say about evolving dark energy
The apparent preference for evolving dark energy depends strongly on which supernova catalog and which BAO survey are used, and is not robust across all independent data combinations.
-
Dark energy and lensing anomaly in Planck CMB data
When the Planck lensing amplitude AL is fitted freely, DESI+CMB+SN data no longer prefer evolving dark energy, and DESI BAO's lower matter density worsens the lensing anomaly in LambdaCDM.
-
Running Vacuum in the expanding Universe: a unified QFT paradigm for Inflation and Dark Energy
The running vacuum model derives dynamical vacuum energy from QFT in curved spacetime, using H^4 terms for inflation and H^2 terms for dark energy while G evolves logarithmically.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.