Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

Searching for coupled, hyperlight scalars across cosmic history

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that early-universe cosmology, not laboratories, sets the strongest limits on quadratically coupled hyperlight scalars, restricting percent-level dark-matter subcomponents to near- or sub-gravitational couplings to…

desk verdict A careful, unusually candid constraints paper that maps where hyperlight quadratically coupled scalars can live; the headline CMB+BAO/SNe bounds for electron couplings are dataset-dependent, but the paper says so. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.04432 v2 pith:KZRQEGVN submitted 2025-02-06 hep-ph astro-ph.CO

Masha Baryakhtar , Olivier Simon , Zachary J. Weiner This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phastro-ph.CO
keywords hyperlightscalarquadraticcouplingfine-structureconstantelectronmasscosmicmicrowavebackgroundquasarabsorptionlinesdarkmattersubcomponentvaryingfundamentalconstants
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish where a new class of hyperlight scalar fields—particles with masses around $10^{-32}$ to $10^{-28}$ eV that are quadratically coupled to the electron mass or the fine-structure constant—can still exist. Because such a scalar is frozen early in cosmic history and only begins oscillating near the present, its main signature is a constant shift in $\alpha$ and $m_e$ during BBN and recombination, together with a gravitational contribution to dark matter. The authors compute how the Standard Model bath back-reacts on the scalar through an in-medium mass, which confines viable models to a narrow coupling window. Within that window they combine BBN, CMB, BAO, and supernova constraints with quasar absorption spectra, concluding that CMB plus BAO plus supernova data give the strongest bounds for masses from $10^{-28.5}$ to about $10^{-31}$ eV, below which quasar spectra dominate. The net result is that a scalar making up a few percent of today's dark matter must couple to electrons or photons at near- or sub-gravitational strength.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the quadratic coupling functions $g_\lambda(\varphi) = d_\lambda^{(2)}\varphi^2/2$, which make the electron mass and fine-structure constant depend on the scalar field. The load-bearing mechanism is the in-medium, thermal mass that the Standard Model bath induces on the scalar, parametrized after electron-positron annihilation by the dimensionless combination $D = (3/2)(Q_b)_\lambda d_\lambda^{(2)}/(1+\omega_c/\omega_b)$. Requiring $|D| \lesssim 1$ keeps the scalar frozen through recombination; the paper derives analytic solutions (Bessel-type before equality, power-law during matter domination) showing that for $|D| \gtrsim 1$ the field rolls before last scattering, invalidating the frozen-field mapping. The mapping itself, Eq. (2.57), converts early-time constant shifts into the product $d_\lambda^{(2)}F_\varphi$, and the cosmological data from Ref. [60] bound $F_\varphi$ and the shifts jointly. For late-time probes, the long oscillation period makes the phase of the scalar unknown, so bounds are obtained by marginalizing over phase, which strongly penalizes atomic clock and equivalence-principle constraints.

What would settle it

Recompute the CMB damping-tail and polarization bounds with a scalar that is allowed to roll during recombination, taking $|D| > 1$ at couplings $d_\lambda^{(2)} \approx 500$ and abundance $F_\varphi \approx 10^{-4}$; if the resulting exclusions on $d_\lambda^{(2)}F_\varphi$ differ from Eq. (2.57), the reported exclusion map must be revised in that corner.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the time-independent shifts in $\alpha$ and $m_e$ that prior phenomenological studies assumed at recombination are only realizable by a scalar in a precisely delimited regime: it must be heavy enough to be frozen until after last scattering, light enough to be relevant today, and coupled weakly enough that matter-induced potentials do not make it roll before recombination ($|D| \lesssim 1$, $|d_\lambda^{(2)}| \lesssim 500$), yet strongly enough that its early-time shift is observable. In this regime the early-time shift is set by Eq. (2.57), $\Delta\lambda_i/\lambda_0 \approx (2/3)d_\lambda^{(2)}F_\varphi/(1+\omega_b/\omega_c)$, so a percent-level abundance $F_\varphi$ maps directly to an allowed coupling. Using the companion CMB analysis (Ref. [60]), the paper reports the most stringent constraints on quadratically coupled scalars with masses $10^{-28.5}$ to $10^{-31}$ eV, with quasar absorption spectra taking over below about $10^{-31}$ eV. For the electron coupling the bound is dataset-dependent, with BAO and supernova combinations disagreeing at the one-to-three $\sigma$ level, while the photon-coupling bound is robust. The result is an exclusion map in which hyperlight scalars that make up a few percent of dark matter are limited to near- or sub-gravitational quadratic couplings to electrons or photons.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the scalar is effectively frozen and time-independent through recombination, so CMB and BBN probes see constant but shifted values of $\alpha$ and $m_e$; the paper bounds this assumption by requiring $|D| \lesssim 1$ and $|d_\lambda^{(2)}| \lesssim 500$, but if a scalar were dynamical during recombination the reported coupling limits would need to be re-derived.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the scalar is frozen through recombination, early-universe data (CMB, BAO, supernovae) exclude quadratic couplings to photons and electrons far more strongly than any terrestrial or astrophysical late-time probe, except at the very lightest masses.
  • A scalar that makes up roughly one to two percent of the dark matter today can no longer hide: at masses $10^{-28.5}$ to $10^{-31}$ eV its couplings to electrons or photons must be near or below gravitational strength.
  • Quasar absorption spectra remain the leading probe below about $10^{-31}$ eV, because such scalars stay frozen and their effect on $\alpha$ and $m_e$ grows as $(1+z)^3$; single finite-duration clock experiments cannot compete because phase marginalization penalizes them.
  • Existing phenomenological bounds on time-independent shifts at recombination are only valid for a nonnegligible scalar abundance, roughly $F_\varphi \gtrsim 10^{-4}$ to $10^{-5}$; below that, in-medium dynamics during recombination require a fully time-dependent treatment.
  • The electron-coupling limit from cosmological data is currently dataset-dependent, with BAO and supernova combinations differing, so the reported exclusion for $d_{m_e}^{(2)}$ should be read as a range, while the photon-coupling limit is robust.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the exclusion map is taken at face value, any model that uses a quadratically coupled scalar to shift $\alpha$ or $m_e$ at recombination, for example to ease the Hubble tension, must have $F_\varphi$ near the percent level and couplings below roughly gravitational strength, otherwise it is already ruled out.
  • The asymmetry between positive and negative couplings, with negative couplings producing growing rather than oscillating solutions, suggests that a dedicated dynamical analysis for negative $d_\lambda^{(2)}$, beyond the frozen-field approximation, could close the remaining window at $F_\varphi \lesssim 10^{-4}$.
  • Future galaxy-survey and CMB data should sharpen the electron-coupling bound and resolve the current BAO and supernova discordance; if the discordance persists, the constraint on $d_{m_e}^{(2)}$ will be limited by systematics rather than by the scalar model itself.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies hyperlight scalar fields coupled quadratically to the electron mass and the fine-structure constant, with masses in the range roughly 10^-32 to 10^-28 eV and present-day abundances of order a percent of the cold dark matter density. The authors compute the in-medium effective potential sourced by Standard Model particles, identify when the scalar can remain frozen through recombination, extend late-time probes (quasars, atomic clocks, equivalence-principle tests, Oklo, pulsar timing, stellar emission) to this regime, and combine these with early-time BBN and CMB+BAO+SNe bounds. The main result is an exclusion map for the quadratic couplings d^(2)_me and d^(2)_e, with the CMB-based analysis (imported from the companion paper [60]) providing the most stringent constraints for masses from about 10^-28.5 eV down to 10^-31 eV, below which quasar absorption spectra become more powerful.

Significance. If the central claim holds, this is the most complete current map of where hyperlight, quadratically coupled scalars can live, and it substantially sharpens earlier phenomenological bounds by grounding them in a concrete field-theoretic model with explicit cosmological dynamics. The paper's strengths are its careful treatment of in-medium matter potentials (with analytic cross-checks in Appendix A), its explicit delineation of the regime where the scalar is frozen through recombination, and its honest reporting of dataset-dependent results in the electron-mass channel. The companion CMB likelihood analysis [60] is separately published and data-driven, so importing its constraints is a reasonable division of labor rather than a circular step. However, the headline claim of 'most stringent constraints' is not uniformly robust: the electron-mass coupling exclusions depend strongly on the choice of low-redshift dataset, as the paper itself documents, and the quasar electron-mass bound at the lowest masses relies on phase-marginalization assumptions that the authors only partially validate.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV B and Figure 5] The abstract's unqualified statement that the CMB+BAO+SNe analysis 'provides the most stringent constraints' is not robust for the electron-mass coupling. Section IV B reports 10^2(me,i/me,0 - 1) = 1.7 +/- 0.7 for Planck+DESI, -1.6 +/- 1 for Planck+DES, 0.8 +/- 0.7 for Planck+SDSS, and -0.6 +/- 1.1 for Planck+Pantheon+, and Figure 5 shows a roughly 2-sigma preference for positive d^(2)_me for the DESI combination while other combinations are consistent with zero. Thus for positive electron couplings, the DESI-based bound does not exclude zero at 95% CL, and the 'most stringent' claim holds only for a particular dataset choice. Although the text discloses the discordance, the abstract and Section IV C present the result without this qualification. The authors should either report the dataset-dependent range as the headline electron-coupling result or justify a specific conservative combination.
  2. [Section III C and Eq. (3.8)] The quasar-derived electron-mass constraint that supersedes the CMB bounds at the lowest masses is not as robust as the photon-coupling result. The phase-marginalized posterior in Figure 3 is visibly skewed toward negative Delta me,0/me,0, and the text states that this skew is driven by a cluster of higher-redshift observations and that the joint bound is inappropriate for m_phi below about 10^-31 eV, where the z_abs < 1 subset gives a much weaker bound. Since the abstract explicitly claims quasar absorption spectra provide stronger bounds below 10^-31 eV, the electron-coupling branch of that claim depends on a set of high-redshift absorbers and an independent-phase assumption that the authors themselves flag as potentially obscuring correlations. This part of the headline should be qualified, or the analysis should be redone with a more careful treatment of phase correlations across the absorber sample.
  3. [Section IV C and Appendix B] The paper's presentation of the CMB-based constraints on d^(2)_me and d^(2)_e mixes likelihood-driven results with prior-driven ones. Appendix B shows that changing from uniform priors over F_phi and the early-time parameter value to a uniform prior over d^(2)_lambda and a log-uniform prior over the initial field value broadens the marginalized posterior over d^(2)_me by about an order of magnitude, even though the posterior over me,i itself is relatively stable. Since Figure 5 and the abstract present d^(2)_lambda exclusions at fixed F_phi = 10^-2, the authors should state more prominently that the marginalized constraints in Figure 4 are prior-dependent and that the robust, likelihood-driven quantity is the early-time shift combination d^(2)_lambda F_phi, not d^(2)_lambda itself.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section IV A, Eq. (4.10)] The BBN constraints are derived from a simplified two-step freeze-out calculation rather than a full nuclear network, and the paper acknowledges that this calculation is insufficient to predict Y_p accurately. Since the CMB bounds are stronger in most of the displayed mass range, this is not fatal, but the authors should either validate Eq. (4.10) against a public BBN code or explicitly state that the BBN curves in Figure 5 are indicative only.
  2. [Section II E 2, Eq. (2.49)] The parameter D defined in Eq. (2.49) combines electron and photon couplings through the weighted sum of dilatonic charges, while later conditions such as Eq. (4.15) are written for individual couplings. The connection between these two levels of approximation could be stated more explicitly to avoid confusion about when matter effects are controlled by |D| versus by |d^(2)_lambda|.
  3. [Section III C, Table I] The quasar sample contains a few extremely large uncertainties, especially the J1120+0641 measurements at z ~ 5-7 with errors of order 10^-4 in Delta alpha/alpha. The text discusses redshift subsamples but does not state how these particular high-redshift, high-uncertainty points affect the joint posterior; a sentence quantifying their influence would make the phase-marginalization check more transparent.
  4. [Section V C] The sentence 'DES, SDSS, and Pantheon datasets rule out |d^(2)_me| smaller than a few' is ambiguous, because the sign of the coupling matters and the displayed posteriors show asymmetric bounds. It would be clearer to quote the actual 95% intervals for each dataset combination.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central CMB limits are imported from a separate, data-driven companion analysis and translated to coupling bounds, not derived from the target result.

full rationale

The paper's early-time constraints are taken from the authors' companion paper [60], which is a separately published, likelihood-based analysis of Planck, BAO, and SNe data. That analysis constrains the early-time values of alpha and the electron mass, and the scalar abundance, without assuming the quadratic-coupling bounds reported here. The mapping from early-time shifts to couplings via Eq. (2.57), (lambda_i - lambda_0)/lambda_0 = (2/3) d^(2)_lambda F_phi/(1 + omega_b/omega_c), is a translation between model parameters and observables, not a fit of the quantity being claimed as a prediction. The in-medium consistency conditions, such as |D| <= 1 and Eq. (4.15), delimit the regime of validity of the frozen-scalar assumption rather than being used to construct the constraints. Late-time bounds from quasars, clocks, equivalence-principle tests, and other probes are re-derived from external measurements with explicit phase-marginalization prescriptions. The dataset-dependence of the electron-mass constraint (e.g., Planck+DESI vs Planck+DES vs Planck+SDSS vs Planck+Pantheon+) is a real robustness concern, but it is not circularity. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction, and no load-bearing argument rests on an unverified self-citation. The central claim is therefore self-contained against external data, with self-citation functioning as independent support rather than circular reasoning.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest on the misalignment mechanism, the quadratic-coupling truncation, the frozen-through-recombination premise, and the in-medium potential computation. None of these is exotic, but each limits the scope of the exclusion map: couplings above |d| ~ 500 and abundances below F_phi ~ 10^-4 are explicitly outside the analyzed regime. The quasar bound additionally assumes phases at different redshifts are independent, which the authors themselves flag as inappropriate below m_phi ~ 10^-31 eV. The dilatonic charge inputs carry O(1) nuclear-model uncertainty that is acknowledged but not propagated into the quoted bounds.

free parameters (5)
  • F_phi, present scalar abundance relative to CDM = 10^-2 fiducial
    Chosen near the largest value allowed by the companion CMB analysis [60]; all coupling bounds are quoted at this fiducial and scale as F_phi^-1 (F_phi^-1/2 for UFF).
  • m_phi, scalar mass = Scanned, 10^-32 to 10^-28 eV
    Model parameter scanned; enters bounds via the amplitude scaling in Eq (2.54) (A proportional to m_eff^-1).
  • Y_He, helium mass fraction = 0.25
    Fiducial value in Eq (2.35) for baryonic dilatonic charges.
  • Baryonic dilatonic charges (Q_b)_lambda = (Q_b)_me ~ 4.8e-4, (Q_b)_e ~ 6.3e-4
    From semi-empirical mass formula, Refs [21, 22]; the photon charge has historical spread from 1.3e-2 to ~1e-4 depending on nuclear model (Section II B).
  • BBN Y_p scaling coefficients = 0.34 (me), 2.6 (alpha), Eq (4.10)
    Computed from the authors' approximate BBN model, stated as a reasonable estimate of scaling rather than a full calculation; they increase to 0.42 if annihilation effects are neglected.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption FLRW background with the scalar subdominant in the Friedmann equation (m_eff^2 phi^2 << H^2)
    Invoked in Section II E; the analysis treats the scalar as a test field. If this fails, the CMB and expansion history must be solved self-consistently.
  • ad hoc to paper Quadratic coupling dominance (vanishing linear term) via a Z_2 symmetry
    Section II A: 'The assumed suppression of terms linear in phi could be achieved with a Z_2 symmetry.' This restricts the phenomenology to quadratic couplings; a small linear term would change the constraints, especially from UFF.
  • domain assumption Misalignment initial conditions: nonzero homogeneous field value
    Section II E: the field has a homogeneous 'misaligned' initial condition; the abundance F_phi and early-time shifts are parametrized through phi_i.
  • domain assumption Scalar frozen through recombination for the analyzed regime
    Section IV B 1: 'we assume that the scalar remains, to a good approximation, constant in time at least until last scattering.' The CMB and BBN constraints only apply inside this regime (|D| <= 1, |d_lambda^(2)| <= 500).
  • standard math Method of background fields for the in-medium potential
    Section II C: thermal path integral evaluating the pressure with phi as background, standard thermal field theory (Dolan-Jackiw, Kapusta-Gale).
  • ad hoc to paper Independent or stochastic phases for quasar absorbers
    Section III C: 'we treat the scalar's phase at each z_abs in the sample as independent and stochastic.' For m_phi below about 10^-31 eV the phases are not effectively stochastic and the authors declare the bound inappropriate.
  • domain assumption Radiative stability / unnaturalness accepted
    Section II A: the hyperlight mass is nominally unnatural, requiring tuning or UV structure; the paper proceeds under the assumption the EFT is valid below about 100 eV.
invented entities (1)
  • The hyperlight scalar phi coupled to F^2 and e-bar-e
    purpose: Modulates alpha and m_e across cosmic history and contributes a dark matter subcomponent; subject of the exclusion search.
    The scalar is not introduced by this paper but borrowed from prior model literature (dilatons, moduli, Higgs portal). No detection exists; the paper's contribution is to rule out large parts of its parameter space.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Searching for coupled, hyperlight scalars across cosmic history." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KZRQEGVN

@misc{pith2026250204432,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Searching for coupled, hyperlight scalars across cosmic history},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KZRQEGVN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.04432}
}
abstract

Cosmological scalar fields coupled to the Standard Model drive temporal variations in the fundamental constants that grow with redshift, positioning the early Universe as a powerful tool to study such models. We investigate the dynamics and phenomenology of coupled scalars from the early Universe to the present to consistently leverage the myriad searches for time-varying constants and the cosmological signatures of scalars' gravitational effects. We compute the in-medium contribution from Standard Model particles to the scalar's dynamics and identify only a limited range of couplings for which the scalar has an observable impact on the fundamental constants without either evolving before recombination or gravitating nonnegligibly. We then extend existing laboratory and astrophysical bounds to the hyperlight scalar regime. We present joint limits from the early and late Universe, specializing to hyperlight, quadratically coupled scalars that modulate the mass of the electron or the strength of electromagnetism and make up a subcomponent of the dark matter today. Our dedicated analysis of observations of the cosmic microwave background, baryon acoustic oscillations, and type Ia supernovae provides the most stringent constraints on quadratically coupled scalars with masses from $10^{-28.5}$ to $\sim 10^{-31}~\mathrm{eV}$, below which quasar absorption spectra yield stronger bounds. These results jointly limit hyperlight scalars that comprise a few percent of the current dark matter density to near- or subgravitational couplings to electrons or photons.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.04432 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Contributions to the effective matter potential Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Constraints on a hyperlight scalar’s quadratic couplings to the electron (left) and photon (right) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Individual and combined posteriors from various observations of quasar absorption lines for a scalar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Posterior distributions over a hyperlight scalar field’s present energy density relative to that of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Exclusion regions for the quadratic couplings of a new scalar to the electron (left column) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Solutions to the Klein-Gordon equation Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Solutions to the Klein-Gordon equation Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p049_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Value φi at which a scalar refreezes after electron-positron annihilation as a function of its quadratic coupling to the electron, obtained by numerically solving the Klein-Gordon equation with effective potential Eq. (2.39), itself evaluated by numerical quadrature of…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison of marginalized posteriors over [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p052_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Marginalized posterior distributions over the early-time electron mass (left) and fine-structure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p053_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Correlated signals of ultralight scalar dark matter in pulsar timing

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A finite-spatial-correlation Gaussian-field prior for PTA ULDM signals interpolates between fully correlated and uncorrelated limits and is validated on blinded mock data for linear and quadratic couplings.

  2. The $H_0$ world cup. II. A comprehensive competition between proposed Hubble tension solutions

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Against a common 2025-26 dataset (Planck PR4, ACT DR6, SPT-3G, DESI DR2, Pantheon+), early dark energy and early modified gravity models win the H0 competition (~3σ residual tension), while radiation and late-time sol...

  3. The $H_0$ World Cup. I. Summary of the baseline group stage results

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    In a systematic head-to-head analysis, early dark energy and early modified gravity models reduce the Hubble tension to about 3σ and are favored over ΛCDM, while radiation and late-time alternatives are not.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

234 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [60]

    S. J. Landau and C. G. Scoccola, Constraints on variation in α and me from WMAP 7-year data, Astron. Astrophys. 517, A62 (2010), arXiv:1002.1603 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2010

  2. [1]

    (2.2) for a homogeneous scalar with Eq

    After annihilation We first solve Eq. (2.2) for a homogeneous scalar with Eq. (2.37) contributing to its dynamics. Written in terms of N ≡ ln a/aeq where aeq is the scale factor at matter-radiation equality, the equation of motion is ∂2 N φ + 3 + ∂N H H ∂N φ = − m2 φ H 2 + D 1 + e−N ! φ (A1) where D ≡3 2 (Qb)ed(2) e + (Qb)med(2) me 1 + ωc/ωb (A2) and ∂N H...

  3. [2]

    (2.40) (in the relativistic limit) may be written as ∂2 N φ + ∂N φ = − m2 φ H 2 + 15d(2) me 2π2 e2N + 25α(0)d(2) e 8π ! φ (A8) where N = ln a/aann ≡ ln me/T

    Before annihilation In the early Universe, the Klein-Gordon equation with the in-medium mass Eq. (2.40) (in the relativistic limit) may be written as ∂2 N φ + ∂N φ = − m2 φ H 2 + 15d(2) me 2π2 e2N + 25α(0)d(2) e 8π ! φ (A8) where N = ln a/aann ≡ ln me/T . Equation (A8) may be solved analytically for each coupling individually; we also compare to numerical...

  4. [3]

    We now consider the effect of priors in more detail

    Impact of priors on marginalized constraints As the discussion of Section IV B 2 suggests, the marginal posteriors over both Fφ and d(2) λ are strongly sensitive to the choice of prior, which impedes drawing robust constraints on the parameters of the underlying model. We now consider the effect of priors in more detail. In Section IV B 2 we selected unif...

    2018

  5. [4]

    Following the discussion in Ref

    Impact of BBN consistency In the class of models we consider (Section II), shifts in the fundamental constants during BBN are generally the same as during recombination (unless the matter effects of Section II C are important, in which case for positive couplings the constants differ from their present-day values even more at earlier times). Following the...

  6. [5]

    Englert and R

    F. Englert and R. Brout, Broken Symmetry and the Mass of Gauge Vector Mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 321 (1964)

    1964

  7. [6]

    P. W. Higgs, Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 508 (1964)

    1964

  8. [7]

    G. S. Guralnik, C. R. Hagen, and T. W. B. Kibble, Global Conservation Laws and Massless Particles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 585 (1964)

    1964

Show all 234 references
  1. [8]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440 (1977)

    1977

  2. [9]

    Wilczek, Problem of Strong P and T Invariance in the Presence of Instantons, Phys

    F. Wilczek, Problem of Strong P and T Invariance in the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 279 (1978)

    1978

  3. [10]

    Weinberg, A New Light Boson?, Phys

    S. Weinberg, A New Light Boson?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 223 (1978)

    1978

  4. [11]

    Brans and R

    C. Brans and R. H. Dicke, Mach’s principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation, Phys. Rev. 124, 925 (1961)

    1961

  5. [12]

    Damour and G

    T. Damour and G. Esposito-Farese, Testing gravity to second postNewtonian order: A Field theory approach, Phys. Rev. D 53, 5541 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9506063

    1996 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Fujii and K

    Y. Fujii and K. Maeda,The scalar-tensor theory of gravitation, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2007)

    2007

  7. [14]

    Scherk and J

    J. Scherk and J. H. Schwarz, Dual Models for Nonhadrons, Nucl. Phys. B 81, 118 (1974)

    1974

  8. [15]

    M. B. Green, J. H. Schwarz, and E. Witten, Superstring Theory Vol. 2: 25th Anniversary Edition , Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2012)

    2012

  9. [16]

    T. R. Taylor and G. Veneziano, Dilaton Couplings at Large Distances, Phys. Lett. B 213, 450 (1988)

    1988

  10. [17]

    Y. M. Cho, UNIFIED COSMOLOGY, Phys. Rev. D 41, 2462 (1990)

    1990

  11. [18]

    Damour and A

    T. Damour and A. M. Polyakov, String theory and gravity, Gen. Rel. Grav. 26, 1171 (1994), arXiv:gr- qc/9411069

    1994

  12. [19]

    D. B. Kaplan and M. B. Wise, Couplings of a light dilaton and violations of the equivalence principle, JHEP 08, 037, arXiv:hep-ph/0008116

    arXiv

  13. [20]

    Gasperini, F

    M. Gasperini, F. Piazza, and G. Veneziano, Quintessence as a runaway dilaton, Phys. Rev. D 65, 023508 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0108016

    2002 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Damour, F

    T. Damour, F. Piazza, and G. Veneziano, Runaway dilaton and equivalence principle violations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 081601 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0204094

    2002 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Dimopoulos and G

    S. Dimopoulos and G. F. Giudice, Macroscopic forces from supersymmetry, Phys. Lett. B 379, 105 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9602350

    1996 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Terazawa, Cosmological Origin of Mass Scales, Phys

    H. Terazawa, Cosmological Origin of Mass Scales, Phys. Lett. B 101, 43 (1981)

    1981

  17. [24]

    J. D. Bekenstein, Fine Structure Constant: Is It Really a Constant?, Phys. Rev. D 25, 1527 (1982)

    1982

  18. [25]

    Damour and J

    T. Damour and J. F. Donoghue, Phenomenology of the Equivalence Principle with Light Scalars, Class. Quant. Grav. 27, 202001 (2010), arXiv:1007.2790 [gr-qc]

    2010 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Damour and J

    T. Damour and J. F. Donoghue, Equivalence Principle Violations and Couplings of a Light Dilaton, Phys. Rev. D 82, 084033 (2010), arXiv:1007.2792 [gr-qc]

    2010 arXiv

  20. [27]

    K. A. Olive and M. Pospelov, Environmental dependence of masses and coupling constants, Phys. Rev. D 77, 043524 (2008), arXiv:0709.3825 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Arvanitaki, J

    A. Arvanitaki, J. Huang, and K. Van Tilburg, Searching for dilaton dark matter with atomic clocks, Phys. Rev. D 91, 015015 (2015), arXiv:1405.2925 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  22. [29]

    P. W. Graham, D. E. Kaplan, J. Mardon, S. Rajendran, and W. A. Terrano, Dark Matter Direct Detection with Accelerometers, Phys. Rev. D 93, 075029 (2016), arXiv:1512.06165 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  23. [30]

    A. Hees, O. Minazzoli, E. Savalle, Y. V. Stadnik, and P. Wolf, Violation of the equivalence principle from light scalar dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 98, 064051 (2018), arXiv:1807.04512 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Arkani-Hamed, S

    N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. R. Dvali, The Hierarchy problem and new dimensions at a millimeter, Phys. Lett. B 429, 263 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9803315

    1998 arXiv

  25. [32]

    E. G. Adelberger, B. R. Heckel, and A. E. Nelson, Tests of the gravitational inverse square law, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 53, 77 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0307284

    2003 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Preskill, M

    J. Preskill, M. B. Wise, and F. Wilczek, Cosmology of the Invisible Axion, Phys. Lett. B 120, 127 55 (1983)

    1983

  27. [34]

    L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion, Phys. Lett. B 120, 133 (1983)

    1983

  28. [35]

    Dine and W

    M. Dine and W. Fischler, The Not So Harmless Axion, Phys. Lett. B 120, 137 (1983)

    1983

  29. [36]

    M. S. Turner, Cosmic and Local Mass Density of Invisible Axions, Phys. Rev. D 33, 889 (1986)

    1986

  30. [37]

    A. D. Linde, Inflation and Axion Cosmology, Phys. Lett. B 201, 437 (1988)

    1988

  31. [38]

    W. Hu, R. Barkana, and A. Gruzinov, Cold and fuzzy dark matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1158 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0003365

    2000 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Piazza and M

    F. Piazza and M. Pospelov, Sub-eV scalar dark matter through the super-renormalizable Higgs portal, Phys. Rev. D 82, 043533 (2010), arXiv:1003.2313 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  33. [40]

    L. Hui, J. P. Ostriker, S. Tremaine, and E. Witten, Ultralight scalars as cosmological dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 95, 043541 (2017), arXiv:1610.08297 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Bouley, P

    T. Bouley, P. Sørensen, and T.-T. Yu, Constraints on ultralight scalar dark matter with quadratic couplings, JHEP 03, 104, arXiv:2211.09826 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  35. [42]

    Banerjee, G

    A. Banerjee, G. Perez, M. Safronova, I. Savoray, and A. Shalit, The phenomenology of quadratically coupled ultra light dark matter, JHEP 10, 042, arXiv:2211.05174 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  36. [43]

    Hannestad, Possible constraints on the time variation of the fine structure constant from cosmic microwave background data, Phys

    S. Hannestad, Possible constraints on the time variation of the fine structure constant from cosmic microwave background data, Phys. Rev. D 60, 023515 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9810102

    1999 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Kaplinghat, R

    M. Kaplinghat, R. J. Scherrer, and M. S. Turner, Constraining variations in the fine structure constant with the cosmic microwave background, Phys. Rev. D 60, 023516 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9810133

    1999 arXiv

  38. [45]

    P. P. Avelino, C. J. A. P. Martins, G. Rocha, and P. T. P. Viana, Looking for a varying alpha in the cosmic microwave background, Phys. Rev. D 62, 123508 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0008446

    2000 arXiv

  39. [46]

    R. A. Battye, R. Crittenden, and J. Weller, Cosmic concordance and the fine structure constant, Phys. Rev. D 63, 043505 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0008265

    2001 arXiv

  40. [47]

    P. P. Avelino, S. Esposito, G. Mangano, C. J. A. P. Martins, A. Melchiorri, G. Miele, O. Pisanti, G. Rocha, and P. T. P. Viana, Early universe constraints on a time varying fine structure constant, Phys. Rev. D 64, 103505 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0102144

    2001 arXiv

  41. [48]

    S. J. Landau, D. D. Harari, and M. Zaldarriaga, Constraining nonstandard recombination: A worked example, Phys. Rev. D 63, 083505 (2001)

    2001

  42. [49]

    C. J. A. P. Martins, A. Melchiorri, G. Rocha, R. Trotta, P. P. Avelino, and P. T. P. Viana, Wmap constraints on varying alpha and the promise of reionization, Phys. Lett. B 585, 29 (2004), arXiv:astro- ph/0302295

    2004

  43. [50]

    Rocha, R

    G. Rocha, R. Trotta, C. J. A. P. Martins, A. Melchiorri, P. P. Avelino, R. Bean, and P. T. P. Viana, Measuring alpha in the early universe: cmb polarization, reionization and the fisher matrix analysis, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 352, 20 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0309211

    2004 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Stefanescu, Constraints on time variation of fine structure constant from WMAP-3yr data, New Astron

    P. Stefanescu, Constraints on time variation of fine structure constant from WMAP-3yr data, New Astron. 12, 635 (2007), arXiv:0707.0190 [astro-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  45. [52]

    Nakashima, R

    M. Nakashima, R. Nagata, and J. Yokoyama, Constraints on the time variation of the fine structure constant by the 5-year WMAP data, Prog. Theor. Phys. 120, 1207 (2008), arXiv:0810.1098 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  46. [53]

    Menegoni, S

    E. Menegoni, S. Galli, J. G. Bartlett, C. J. A. P. Martins, and A. Melchiorri, New Constraints on variations of the fine structure constant from CMB anisotropies, Phys. Rev. D 80, 087302 (2009), arXiv:0909.3584 [astro-ph.CO]

    2009 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Menegoni, M

    E. Menegoni, M. Archidiacono, E. Calabrese, S. Galli, C. J. A. P. Martins, and A. Melchiorri, The Fine Structure Constant and the CMB Damping Scale, Phys. Rev. D 85, 107301 (2012), arXiv:1202.1476 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  48. [55]

    Kujat and R

    J. Kujat and R. J. Scherrer, The Effect of time variation in the Higgs vacuum expectation value on the cosmic microwave background, Phys. Rev. D 62, 023510 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9912174

    2000 arXiv

  49. [56]

    Ichikawa, T

    K. Ichikawa, T. Kanzaki, and M. Kawasaki, CMB constraints on the simultaneous variation of the fine structure constant and electron mass, Phys. Rev. D 74, 023515 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0602577

    2006 arXiv

  50. [57]

    S. J. Landau, M. E. Mosquera, C. G. Scoccola, and H. Vucetich, Early Universe Constraints on Time Variation of Fundamental Constants, Phys. Rev. D 78, 083527 (2008), arXiv:0809.2033 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  51. [58]

    C. G. Scoccola, S. J. Landau, and H. Vucetich, WMAP 5-year constraints on time variation of α and me in a detailed recombination scenario, Phys. Lett. B 669, 212 (2008), arXiv:0809.5028 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  52. [59]

    Nakashima, K

    M. Nakashima, K. Ichikawa, R. Nagata, and J. Yokoyama, Constraining the time variation of the coupling constants from cosmic microwave background: effect of \Lambda QCD, JCAP 01, 030, 56 arXiv:0910.0742 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    C. G. Scoccola et al. , The clustering of galaxies in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: constraints on the time variation of fundamental constants from the large-scale two-point correlation function, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 434, 1792 (2013), arXiv:1209....

    2013 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Sch¨ oneberg and L

    N. Sch¨ oneberg and L. Vacher, The mass effect – Variations of masses and their impact on cosmology, arXiv:2407.16845 [astro-ph.CO] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Sibiryakov, P

    S. Sibiryakov, P. Sørensen, and T.-T. Yu, BBN constraints on universally-coupled ultralight scalar dark matter, JHEP 12, 075, arXiv:2006.04820 [hep-ph]

    2006 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Baryakhtar, O

    M. Baryakhtar, O. Simon, and Z. J. Weiner, Cosmology with varying fundamental constants from hyperlight, coupled scalars, Phys. Rev. D 110, 083505 (2024), arXiv:2405.10358 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    K. A. Olive, M. Pospelov, Y.-Z. Qian, A. Coc, M. Casse, and E. Vangioni-Flam, Constraints on the variations of the fundamental couplings, Phys. Rev. D 66, 045022 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0205269

    2002 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Uzan, Varying Constants, Gravitation and Cosmology, Living Rev

    J.-P. Uzan, Varying Constants, Gravitation and Cosmology, Living Rev. Rel. 14, 2 (2011), arXiv:1009.5514 [astro-ph.CO]

    2011 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Uzan, Fundamental constants: from measurement to the universe, a window on gravitation and cosmology, arXiv:2410.07281 [astro-ph.CO] (2024)

    J.-P. Uzan, Fundamental constants: from measurement to the universe, a window on gravitation and cosmology, arXiv:2410.07281 [astro-ph.CO] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  60. [68]

    A. Coc, N. J. Nunes, K. A. Olive, J.-P. Uzan, and E. Vangioni, Coupled Variations of Fundamental Couplings and Primordial Nucleosynthesis, Phys. Rev. D 76, 023511 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0610733

    2007 arXiv

  61. [69]

    L. W. H. Fung, L. Li, T. Liu, H. N. Luu, Y.-C. Qiu, and S. H. H. Tye, Axi-Higgs cosmology, JCAP 08, 057, arXiv:2102.11257 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  62. [70]

    L. W. H. Fung, L. Li, T. Liu, H. N. Luu, Y.-C. Qiu, and S. H. H. Tye, Hubble constant in the axi-Higgs universe, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, L022059 (2023), arXiv:2105.01631 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  63. [71]

    H. N. Luu, Axion-Higgs cosmology: Cosmic microwave background and cosmological tensions, Phys. Rev. D 107, 023513 (2023), arXiv:2111.01347 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  64. [72]

    J. E. Kim, Weak Interaction Singlet and Strong CP Invariance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 103 (1979)

    1979

  65. [73]

    M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, Can Confinement Ensure Natural CP Invariance of Strong Interactions?, Nucl. Phys. B 166, 493 (1980)

    1980

  66. [74]

    M. Dine, W. Fischler, and M. Srednicki, A Simple Solution to the Strong CP Problem with a Harmless Axion, Phys. Lett. B 104, 199 (1981)

    1981

  67. [75]

    A. R. Zhitnitsky, On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions. (In Russian), Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 31, 260 (1980)

    1980

  68. [76]

    R. L. Workman et al. (Particle Data Group), Review of Particle Physics, PTEP 2022, 083C01 (2022)

    2022

  69. [77]

    S. M. Carroll, Quintessence and the rest of the world, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3067 (1998), arXiv:astro- ph/9806099

    1998

  70. [78]

    Lue, L.-M

    A. Lue, L.-M. Wang, and M. Kamionkowski, Cosmological signature of new parity violating interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1506 (1999), arXiv:astro-ph/9812088

    1999 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Arvanitaki, S

    A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper, and J. March-Russell, String Axiverse, Phys. Rev. D 81, 123530 (2010), arXiv:0905.4720 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Agrawal, A

    P. Agrawal, A. Hook, and J. Huang, A CMB Millikan experiment with cosmic axiverse strings, JHEP 07, 138, arXiv:1912.02823 [astro-ph.CO]

    1912 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Diego-Palazuelos et al., Cosmic Birefringence from the Planck Data Release 4, Phys

    P. Diego-Palazuelos et al., Cosmic Birefringence from the Planck Data Release 4, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 091302 (2022), arXiv:2201.07682 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  74. [82]

    W. W. Yin, L. Dai, J. Huang, L. Ji, and S. Ferraro, New Probe of Cosmic Birefringence Using Galaxy Polarization and Shapes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 161001 (2025), arXiv:2402.18568 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  75. [83]

    R. M. Sullivan, A. Abghari, P. Diego-Palazuelos, L. T. Hergt, and D. Scott, Planck PR4 (NPIPE) map-space cosmic birefringence, arXiv:2502.07654 [astro-ph.CO] (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Flambaum, S

    V. Flambaum, S. Lambert, and M. Pospelov, Scalar-tensor theories with pseudoscalar couplings, Phys. Rev. D 80, 105021 (2009), arXiv:0902.3217 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Smith, M

    A. Smith, M. Mylova, P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, C. P. Burgess, and A.-C. Davis, CMB Implications of Multi-field Axio-dilaton Cosmology, arXiv:2408.10820 [hep-th] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Smith, M

    A. Smith, M. Mylova, P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, C. P. Burgess, and A.-C. Davis, A Minimal Axio-dilaton Dark Sector, arXiv:2410.11099 [hep-th] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Cyncynates and Z

    D. Cyncynates and Z. J. Weiner, Experimental targets for dark photon dark matter, arXiv:2410.14774 57 [hep-ph] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Brzeminski, Z

    D. Brzeminski, Z. Chacko, A. Dev, and A. Hook, Time-varying fine structure constant from naturally ultralight dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 104, 075019 (2021), arXiv:2012.02787 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  81. [89]

    G. F. Giudice, E. W. Kolb, and A. Riotto, Largest temperature of the radiation era and its cosmological implications, Phys. Rev. D 64, 023508 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0005123

    2001 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Kawasaki, K

    M. Kawasaki, K. Kohri, and N. Sugiyama, MeV scale reheating temperature and thermalization of neutrino background, Phys. Rev. D 62, 023506 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0002127

    2000 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Kawasaki, K

    M. Kawasaki, K. Kohri, and T. Moroi, Big-Bang nucleosynthesis and hadronic decay of long-lived massive particles, Phys. Rev. D 71, 083502 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0408426

    2005 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Hannestad, What is the lowest possible reheating temperature?, Phys

    S. Hannestad, What is the lowest possible reheating temperature?, Phys. Rev. D 70, 043506 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0403291

    2004 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Ichikawa, M

    K. Ichikawa, M. Kawasaki, and F. Takahashi, The Oscillation effects on thermalization of the neutrinos in the Universe with low reheating temperature, Phys. Rev. D 72, 043522 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0505395

    2005 arXiv

  86. [94]

    P. F. de Salas, M. Lattanzi, G. Mangano, G. Miele, S. Pastor, and O. Pisanti, Bounds on very low reheating scenarios after Planck, Phys. Rev. D 92, 123534 (2015), arXiv:1511.00672 [astro-ph.CO]

    2015 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Hasegawa, N

    T. Hasegawa, N. Hiroshima, K. Kohri, R. S. L. Hansen, T. Tram, and S. Hannestad, MeV-scale reheating temperature and thermalization of oscillating neutrinos by radiative and hadronic decays of massive particles, JCAP 12, 012, arXiv:1908.10189 [hep-ph]

    1908 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Arvanitaki, S

    A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, V. Gorbenko, J. Huang, and K. Van Tilburg, A small weak scale from a small cosmological constant, JHEP 05, 071, arXiv:1609.06320 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  89. [97]

    Hlozek, D

    R. Hlozek, D. Grin, D. J. E. Marsh, and P. G. Ferreira, A search for ultralight axions using precision cosmological data, Phys. Rev. D 91, 103512 (2015), arXiv:1410.2896 [astro-ph.CO]

    2015 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Hloˇ zek, D

    R. Hloˇ zek, D. J. E. Marsh, D. Grin, R. Allison, J. Dunkley, and E. Calabrese, Future CMB tests of dark matter: Ultralight axions and massive neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D 95, 123511 (2017), arXiv:1607.08208 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Hlozek, D

    R. Hlozek, D. J. E. Marsh, and D. Grin, Using the Full Power of the Cosmic Microwave Background to Probe Axion Dark Matter, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 476, 3063 (2018), arXiv:1708.05681 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Lagu¨ e, J

    A. Lagu¨ e, J. R. Bond, R. Hloˇ zek, K. K. Rogers, D. J. E. Marsh, and D. Grin, Constraining ultralight axions with galaxy surveys, JCAP 01 (01), 049, arXiv:2104.07802 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  93. [101]

    K. K. Rogers, R. Hloˇ zek, A. Lagu¨ e, M. M. Ivanov, O. H. E. Philcox, G. Cabass, K. Akitsu, and D. J. E. Marsh, Ultra-light axions and the S 8 tension: joint constraints from the cosmic microwave background and galaxy clustering, JCAP 06, 023, arXiv:2301.08361 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  94. [102]

    K. A. Olive and M. Pospelov, Evolution of the fine structure constant driven by dark matter and the cosmological constant, Phys. Rev. D 65, 085044 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0110377

    2002 arXiv

  95. [103]

    H. M. Tohfa, J. Crump, E. Baker, L. Hart, D. Grin, M. Brosius, and J. Chluba, Cosmic microwave back- ground search for fine-structure constant evolution, Phys. Rev. D 109, 103529 (2024), arXiv:2307.06768 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024

  96. [104]

    Gasser and H

    J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Quark Masses, Phys. Rept. 87, 77 (1982)

    1982

  97. [105]

    Dolan and R

    L. Dolan and R. Jackiw, Symmetry Behavior at Finite Temperature, Phys. Rev. D 9, 3320 (1974)

    1974

  98. [106]

    Weinberg, Gauge and Global Symmetries at High Temperature, Phys

    S. Weinberg, Gauge and Global Symmetries at High Temperature, Phys. Rev. D 9, 3357 (1974)

    1974

  99. [107]

    M. D. Schwartz, Quantum Field Theory and the Standard Model (Cambridge University Press, 2014)

    2014

  100. [108]

    J. I. Kapusta and C. Gale, Finite-temperature field theory: Principles and applications , Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2011)

    2011

  101. [109]

    Batell and A

    B. Batell and A. Ghalsasi, Thermal misalignment of scalar dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 107, L091701 (2023), arXiv:2109.04476 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  102. [110]

    A. L. Erickcek, N. Barnaby, C. Burrage, and Z. Huang, Chameleons in the Early Universe: Kicks, Rebounds, and Particle Production, Phys. Rev. D 89, 084074 (2014), arXiv:1310.5149 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  103. [111]

    P. B. Arnold and C.-x. Zhai, The Three loop free energy for high temperature QED and QCD with fermions, Phys. Rev. D 51, 1906 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9410360

    1995 arXiv

  104. [112]

    Aghanim et al

    N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  105. [113]

    Grayson, C

    C. Grayson, C. T. Yang, M. Formanek, and J. Rafelski, Electron–positron plasma in BBN: Damped- dynamic screening, Annals Phys. 458, 169453 (2023), arXiv:2307.11264 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  106. [114]

    L. C. Thomas, T. Dezen, E. B. Grohs, and C. T. Kishimoto, Electron-Positron Annihilation Freeze-Out 58 in the Early Universe, Phys. Rev. D 101, 063507 (2020), arXiv:1910.14050 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  107. [115]

    Thorne and R

    K. Thorne and R. Blandford, Modern Classical Physics: Optics, Fluids, Plasmas, Elasticity, Relativity, and Statistical Physics (Princeton University Press, 2017)

    2017

  108. [116]

    P. J. McMillan, Mass models of the Milky Way, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 414, 2446 (2011), arXiv:1102.4340 [astro-ph.GA]

    2011 arXiv

  109. [117]

    D. J. E. Marsh, Axion Cosmology, Phys. Rept. 643, 1 (2016), arXiv:1510.07633 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  110. [118]

    G. P. Centers et al. , Stochastic fluctuations of bosonic dark matter, Nature Commun. 12, 7321 (2021), arXiv:1905.13650 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  111. [119]

    Y. Su, B. R. Heckel, E. G. Adelberger, J. H. Gundlach, M. Harris, G. L. Smith, and H. E. Swanson, New tests of the universality of free fall, Phys. Rev. D 50, 3614 (1994)

    1994

  112. [120]

    Damour and D

    T. Damour and D. Vokrouhlicky, The Equivalence principle and the moon, Phys. Rev. D 53, 4177 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9507016

    1996 arXiv

  113. [121]

    J. W. Morgan and E. Anders, Chemical composition of earth, venus, and mercury, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 77, 6973 (1980)

    1980

  114. [122]

    Ubachs, J

    W. Ubachs, J. Bagdonaite, E. J. Salumbides, M. T. Murphy, and L. Kaper, Search for a drifting proton– electron mass ratio from H 2, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 021003 (2016), arXiv:1511.04476 [astro-ph.GA]

    2016 arXiv

  115. [123]

    Savedoff, Physical constants in extra-galactic nebulae, Nature 178, 688 (1956)

    M. Savedoff, Physical constants in extra-galactic nebulae, Nature 178, 688 (1956)

    1956

  116. [124]

    Petitjean, R

    P. Petitjean, R. Srianand, H. Chand, A. Ivanchik, P. Noterdaeme, and N. Gupta, Constraining fundamental constants of physics with quasar absorption line systems, Space science reviews 148, 289 (2009)

    2009

  117. [125]

    Srianand, P

    R. Srianand, P. Petitjean, H. Chand, P. Noterdaeme, and N. Gupta, Probing the variation of fundamental constants using qso absorption lines, Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana 80, 842 (2009)

    2009

  118. [126]

    Kanekar, Probing fundamental constant evolution with redshifted radio lines, Mem

    N. Kanekar, Probing fundamental constant evolution with redshifted radio lines, Mem. Soc. Ast. It. 80, 895 (2009)

    2009

  119. [127]

    M. T. Murphy, V. V. Flambaum, S. Muller, and C. Henkel, Strong Limit on a Variable Proton-to- Electron Mass Ratio from Molecules in the Distant Universe, Science 320, 1611 (2008), arXiv:0806.3081 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  120. [128]

    Bagdonaite, M

    J. Bagdonaite, M. Dapr` a, P. Jansen, H. L. Bethlem, W. Ubachs, S. Muller, C. Henkel, and K. M. Menten, Robust Constraint on a Drifting Proton-to-Electron Mass Ratio at z=0.89 from Methanol Observation at Three Radio Telescopes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 231101 (2013), arXiv:1311....

    2013 arXiv

  121. [129]

    Kanekar, G

    N. Kanekar, G. I. Langston, J. T. Stocke, C. L. Carilli, and K. M. Menten, Constraining fundamental constant evolution with HI and OH lines, Astrophys. J. Lett. 746, L16 (2012), arXiv:1201.3372 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  122. [130]

    Kanekar, T

    N. Kanekar, T. Ghosh, and J. N. Chengalur, Stringent Constraints on Fundamental Constant Evolution Using Conjugate 18 cm Satellite OH Lines, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 061302 (2018), arXiv:1801.07688 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  123. [131]

    M. T. Murphy, A. L. Malec, and J. X. Prochaska, Precise limits on cosmological variability of the fine-structure constant with zinc and chromium quasar absorption lines, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 461, 2461 (2016), arXiv:1606.06293 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  124. [132]

    M. T. Murphy and K. L. Cooksey, Subaru Telescope limits on cosmological variations in the fine- structure constant, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 471, 4930 (2017), arXiv:1708.00014 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  125. [133]

    T. M. Evans et al. , The UVES Large Program for testing fundamental physics – III. Constraints on the fine-structure constant from three telescopes, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 445, 128 (2014), arXiv:1409.1923 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  126. [134]

    M. R. Wilczynska et al. , Four direct measurements of the fine-structure constant 13 billion years ago, Sci. Adv. 6, eaay9672 (2020), arXiv:2003.07627 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  127. [135]

    J. B. Whitmore and M. T. Murphy, Impact of instrumental systematic errors on fine-structure constant measurements with quasar spectra, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 447, 446 (2015), arXiv:1409.4467 [astro-ph.IM]

    2015 arXiv

  128. [136]

    T. A. Wagner, S. Schlamminger, J. H. Gundlach, and E. G. Adelberger, Torsion-balance tests of the weak equivalence principle, Class. Quant. Grav. 29, 184002 (2012), arXiv:1207.2442 [gr-qc]

    2012 arXiv

  129. [137]

    Oswald et al

    R. Oswald et al. , Search for Dark-Matter-Induced Oscillations of Fundamental Constants Using Molecular Spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 031302 (2022), arXiv:2111.06883 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  130. [138]

    Ferrer and J

    F. Ferrer and J. A. Grifols, Long range forces from pseudoscalar exchange, Phys. Rev. D 58, 096006 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9805477. 59

    1998 arXiv

  131. [139]

    Ferrer and J

    F. Ferrer and J. A. Grifols, Effects of Bose-Einstein condensation on forces among bodies sitting in a boson heat bath, Phys. Rev. D 63, 025020 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0001185

    2001 arXiv

  132. [140]

    Bauer and G

    M. Bauer and G. Rostagni, Fifth Forces from QCD Axions Scale Differently, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 101802 (2024), arXiv:2307.09516 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  133. [141]

    Schlamminger, K

    S. Schlamminger, K. Y. Choi, T. A. Wagner, J. H. Gundlach, and E. G. Adelberger, Test of the equiv- alence principle using a rotating torsion balance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 041101 (2008), arXiv:0712.0607 [gr-qc]

    2008 arXiv

  134. [142]

    Touboul et al

    P. Touboul et al. , Result of the MICROSCOPE weak equivalence principle test, Class. Quant. Grav. 39, 204009 (2022), arXiv:2209.15488 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  135. [143]

    Naudet, Oklo, des r´ eacteurs nucl´ eaires fossiles: ´ etude physique(Eyrolles, 1991)

    R. Naudet, Oklo, des r´ eacteurs nucl´ eaires fossiles: ´ etude physique(Eyrolles, 1991)

    1991

  136. [144]

    Shlyakhter, Direct test of the constancy of the fundamental nuclear constants using the oklo natural reactor, Preprint of LNPI-260,(September, 1976) (1976)

    A. Shlyakhter, Direct test of the constancy of the fundamental nuclear constants using the oklo natural reactor, Preprint of LNPI-260,(September, 1976) (1976)

    1976

  137. [145]

    A. I. SHLYAKHTER, Direct test of the constancy of fundamental nuclear constants, Nature 264, 340 (1976)

    1976

  138. [146]

    Van Tilburg, N

    K. Van Tilburg, N. Leefer, L. Bougas, and D. Budker, Search for ultralight scalar dark matter with atomic spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 011802 (2015), arXiv:1503.06886 [physics.atom-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  139. [147]

    A. Hees, J. Gu´ ena, M. Abgrall, S. Bize, and P. Wolf, Searching for an oscillating massive scalar field as a dark matter candidate using atomic hyperfine frequency comparisons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 061301 (2016), arXiv:1604.08514 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  140. [148]

    C. J. Kennedy, E. Oelker, J. M. Robinson, T. Bothwell, D. Kedar, W. R. Milner, G. E. Marti, A. Derevianko, and J. Ye, Precision Metrology Meets Cosmology: Improved Constraints on Ultra- light Dark Matter from Atom-Cavity Frequency Comparisons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 201302 (202...

    2020 arXiv

  141. [149]

    Beloy et al

    K. Beloy et al. (BACON), Frequency ratio measurements at 18-digit accuracy using an optical clock network, Nature 591, 564 (2021), arXiv:2005.14694 [physics.atom-ph]

    2021

  142. [150]

    Kozyryev, Z

    I. Kozyryev, Z. Lasner, and J. M. Doyle, Enhanced sensitivity to ultralight bosonic dark matter in the spectra of the linear radical SrOH, Phys. Rev. A 103, 043313 (2021), arXiv:1805.08185 [physics.atom- ph]

    2021 arXiv

  143. [151]

    Kobayashi et al

    T. Kobayashi et al. , Search for Ultralight Dark Matter from Long-Term Frequency Comparisons of Optical and Microwave Atomic Clocks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 241301 (2022), arXiv:2212.05721 [physics.atom-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  144. [152]

    Filzinger, S

    M. Filzinger, S. D¨ orscher, R. Lange, J. Klose, M. Steinel, E. Benkler, E. Peik, C. Lisdat, and N. Huntemann, Improved Limits on the Coupling of Ultralight Bosonic Dark Matter to Photons from Optical Atomic Clock Comparisons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 253001 (2023), arXiv:2301.03...

    2023 arXiv

  145. [153]

    T. M. Fortier et al., Precision atomic spectroscopy for improved limits on variation of the fine structure constant and local position invariance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 070801 (2007)

    2007

  146. [154]

    Rosenband et al., Frequency Ratio of Al+ and Hg+ Single-Ion Optical Clocks; Metrology at the 17th Decimal Place, Science 319, 1154622 (2008)

    T. Rosenband et al., Frequency Ratio of Al+ and Hg+ Single-Ion Optical Clocks; Metrology at the 17th Decimal Place, Science 319, 1154622 (2008)

    2008

  147. [155]

    Guena, M

    J. Guena, M. Abgrall, D. Rovera, P. Rosenbusch, M. E. Tobar, P. Laurent, A. Clairon, and S. Bize, Improved Tests of Local Position Invariance Using Rb-87 and Cs-133 Fountains, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 080801 (2012), arXiv:1205.4235 [physics.atom-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  148. [156]

    Leefer, C

    N. Leefer, C. T. M. Weber, A. Cing¨ oz, J. R. Torgerson, and D. Budker, New limits on variation of the fine-structure constant using atomic dysprosium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 060801 (2013), arXiv:1304.6940 [physics.atom-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  149. [157]

    M. E. Tobar et al. , Testing local position and fundamental constant invariance due to periodic gravitational and boost using long-term comparison of the SYRTE atomic fountains and H-masers, Phys. Rev. D 87, 122004 (2013), arXiv:1306.1571 [gr-qc]

    2013 arXiv

  150. [158]

    Huntemann, B

    N. Huntemann, B. Lipphardt, C. Tamm, V. Gerginov, S. Weyers, and E. Peik, Improved limit on a temporal variation of mp/me from comparisons of Yb + and Cs atomic clocks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 210802 (2014), arXiv:1407.4408 [physics.atom-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  151. [159]

    R. M. Godun, P. B. R. Nisbet-Jones, J. M. Jones, S. A. King, L. A. M. Johnson, H. S. Margolis, K. Szymaniec, S. N. Lea, K. Bongs, and P. Gill, Frequency Ratio of Two Optical Clock Transitions in Yb+171 and Constraints on the Time Variation of Fundamental Constants, Phys. Rev. ...

    2014 arXiv

  152. [160]

    M. S. Safronova, D. Budker, D. DeMille, D. F. J. Kimball, A. Derevianko, and C. W. Clark, Search for New Physics with Atoms and Molecules, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 025008 (2018), arXiv:1710.01833 [physics.atom-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  153. [161]

    D. E. Kaplan, A. Mitridate, and T. Trickle, Constraining fundamental constant variations from ultralight dark matter with pulsar timing arrays, Phys. Rev. D 106, 035032 (2022), arXiv:2205.06817 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  154. [162]

    Afzal et al

    A. Afzal et al. (NANOGrav), The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Search for Signals from New Physics, As- trophys. J. Lett. 951, L11 (2023), [Erratum: Astrophys.J.Lett. 971, L27 (2024), Erratum: Astrophys.J. 971, L27 (2024)], arXiv:2306.16219 [astro-ph.HE]

    2023 arXiv

  155. [163]

    M. J. Dolan, F. J. Hiskens, and R. R. Volkas, Advancing globular cluster constraints on the axion-photon coupling, JCAP 10, 096, arXiv:2207.03102 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  156. [164]

    Hardy and R

    E. Hardy and R. Lasenby, Stellar cooling bounds on new light particles: plasma mixing effects, JHEP 02, 033, arXiv:1611.05852 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  157. [165]

    Bottaro, A

    S. Bottaro, A. Caputo, G. Raffelt, and E. Vitagliano, Stellar limits on scalars from electron-nucleus bremsstrahlung, JCAP 07, 071, arXiv:2303.00778 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  158. [166]

    T. Dent, S. Stern, and C. Wetterich, Primordial nucleosynthesis as a probe of fundamental physics parameters, Phys. Rev. D 76, 063513 (2007), arXiv:0705.0696 [astro-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  159. [167]

    M. T. Clara and C. J. A. P. Martins, Primordial nucleosynthesis with varying fundamental constants: Improved constraints and a possible solution to the Lithium problem, Astron. Astrophys. 633, L11 (2020), arXiv:2001.01787 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  160. [168]

    V. F. Mukhanov, Nucleosynthesis without a computer, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 43, 669 (2004), arXiv:astro- ph/0303073

    2004

  161. [169]

    Czarnecki, W

    A. Czarnecki, W. J. Marciano, and A. Sirlin, Neutron Lifetime and Axial Coupling Connection, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 202002 (2018), arXiv:1802.01804 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  162. [170]

    Czarnecki, W

    A. Czarnecki, W. J. Marciano, and A. Sirlin, Precision measurements and CKM unitarity, Phys. Rev. D 70, 093006 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0406324

    2004 arXiv

  163. [171]

    D. H. Wilkinson, Phase space for neutron beta-decay: An update, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 404, 305 (1998)

    1998

  164. [172]

    Borsanyi et al

    S. Borsanyi et al. (BMW), Ab initio calculation of the neutron-proton mass difference, Science 347, 1452 (2015), arXiv:1406.4088 [hep-lat]

    2015 arXiv

  165. [173]

    A. W. Thomas, X. G. Wang, and R. D. Young, Electromagnetic Contribution to the Proton-Neutron Mass Splitting, Phys. Rev. C 91, 015209 (2015), arXiv:1406.4579 [nucl-th]

    2015 arXiv

  166. [174]

    Gasser and H

    J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Implications of Scaling for the Proton - Neutron Mass - Difference, Nucl. Phys. B 94, 269 (1975)

    1975

  167. [175]

    Gasser, H

    J. Gasser, H. Leutwyler, and A. Rusetsky, Sum rule for the Compton amplitude and implications for the proton–neutron mass difference, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 1121 (2020), arXiv:2008.05806 [hep-ph]

    2020

  168. [176]

    Gasser, H

    J. Gasser, H. Leutwyler, and A. Rusetsky, On the mass difference between proton and neutron, Phys. Lett. B 814, 136087 (2021), arXiv:2003.13612 [hep-ph]

    2021

  169. [177]

    Walker-Loud, On the Cottingham formula and the electromagnetic contribution to the proton- neutron mass splitting, PoS CD2018, 045 (2019), arXiv:1907.05459 [nucl-th]

    A. Walker-Loud, On the Cottingham formula and the electromagnetic contribution to the proton- neutron mass splitting, PoS CD2018, 045 (2019), arXiv:1907.05459 [nucl-th]

    2019 arXiv

  170. [178]

    Saikawa and S

    K. Saikawa and S. Shirai, Primordial gravitational waves, precisely: The role of thermodynamics in the Standard Model, JCAP 05, 035, arXiv:1803.01038 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  171. [179]

    R. J. Cooke, M. Pettini, and C. C. Steidel, One Percent Determination of the Primordial Deuterium Abundance, Astrophys. J. 855, 102 (2018), arXiv:1710.11129 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  172. [180]

    P. A. Kislitsyn, S. A. Balashev, M. T. Murphy, C. Ledoux, P. Noterdaeme, and A. V. Ivanchik, A new precise determination of the primordial abundance of deuterium: measurement in the metal-poor sub-DLA system at z = 3.42 towards quasar J 1332+0052, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 5...

    2024 arXiv

  173. [181]

    Mossa et al

    V. Mossa et al. , The baryon density of the Universe from an improved rate of deuterium burning, Nature 587, 210 (2020)

    2020

  174. [182]

    T.-H. Yeh, K. A. Olive, and B. D. Fields, The impact of new d(p, γ)3 rates on Big Bang Nucleosynthesis, JCAP 03, 046, arXiv:2011.13874 [astro-ph.CO]

    2011 arXiv

  175. [183]

    Sekiguchi and T

    T. Sekiguchi and T. Takahashi, Early recombination as a solution to the H0 tension, Phys. Rev. D 103, 083507 (2021), arXiv:2007.03381 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  176. [184]

    Hart and J

    L. Hart and J. Chluba, Updated fundamental constant constraints from Planck 2018 data and possible 61 relations to the Hubble tension, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 493, 3255 (2020), arXiv:1912.03986 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  177. [185]

    A. G. Adame et al. (DESI), DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological Constraints from the Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations, arXiv:2404.03002 [astro-ph.CO] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  178. [186]

    Loverde and Z

    M. Loverde and Z. J. Weiner, Massive neutrinos and cosmic composition, arXiv:2410.00090 [astro- ph.CO] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  179. [187]

    T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES), The Dark Energy Survey: Cosmology Results with ∼1500 New High- redshift Type Ia Supernovae Using the Full 5 yr Data Set, Astrophys. J. Lett. 973, L14 (2024), arXiv:2401.02929 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  180. [188]

    J. E. Bautista et al. (eBOSS), The Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: measurement of the BAO and growth rate of structure of the luminous red galaxy sample from the anisotropic correlation function between redshifts 0.6 and 1, Mon. Not. Roy. As...

    2020 arXiv

  181. [189]

    Gil-Marin et al

    H. Gil-Marin et al. (eBOSS), The Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: measurement of the BAO and growth rate of structure of the luminous red galaxy sample from the anisotropic power spectrum between redshifts 0.6 and 1.0, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. ...

    2020 arXiv

  182. [190]

    Beutler, C

    F. Beutler, C. Blake, M. Colless, D. H. Jones, L. Staveley-Smith, L. Campbell, Q. Parker, W. Saunders, and F. Watson, The 6dF Galaxy Survey: Baryon Acoustic Oscillations and the Local Hubble Constant, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 416, 3017 (2011), arXiv:1106.3366 [astro-ph.CO]

    2011 arXiv

  183. [191]

    Brout et al

    D. Brout et al. , The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmological Constraints, Astrophys. J. 938, 110 (2022), arXiv:2202.04077 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  184. [192]

    Scolnic et al

    D. Scolnic et al. , The Pantheon+ Analysis: The Full Data Set and Light-curve Release, Astrophys. J. 938, 113 (2022), arXiv:2112.03863 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  185. [193]

    Rubin et al

    D. Rubin et al. , Union Through UNITY: Cosmology with 2,000 SNe Using a Unified Bayesian Framework, arXiv:2311.12098 [astro-ph.CO] (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  186. [194]

    D. M. Scolnic et al. (Pan-STARRS1), The Complete Light-curve Sample of Spectroscopically Confirmed SNe Ia from Pan-STARRS1 and Cosmological Constraints from the Combined Pantheon Sample, Astrophys. J. 859, 101 (2018), arXiv:1710.00845 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  187. [195]

    Vacher and N

    L. Vacher and N. Sch¨ oneberg, Incompatibility of fine-structure constant variations at recombination with local observations, Phys. Rev. D 109, 103520 (2024), arXiv:2403.02256 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  188. [196]

    Hart and J

    L. Hart and J. Chluba, New constraints on time-dependent variations of fundamental constants using Planck data, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 474, 1850 (2018), arXiv:1705.03925 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  189. [197]

    N. Lee, Y. Ali-Ha ¨ ımoud, N. Sch¨ oneberg, and V. Poulin, What It Takes to Solve the Hubble Ten- sion through Modifications of Cosmological Recombination, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 161003 (2023), arXiv:2212.04494 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  190. [198]

    Karwal, M

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

    2022 arXiv

  191. [199]

    M.-X. Lin, E. McDonough, J. C. Hill, and W. Hu, Dark matter trigger for early dark energy coincidence, Phys. Rev. D 107, 103523 (2023), arXiv:2212.08098 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  192. [200]

    Sakstein and M

    J. Sakstein and M. Trodden, Early Dark Energy from Massive Neutrinos as a Natural Resolution of the Hubble Tension, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 161301 (2020), arXiv:1911.11760 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  193. [201]

    Carrillo Gonz´ alez, Q

    M. Carrillo Gonz´ alez, Q. Liang, J. Sakstein, and M. Trodden, Neutrino-Assisted Early Dark Energy: Theory and Cosmology, JCAP 04, 063, arXiv:2011.09895 [astro-ph.CO]

    2011 arXiv

  194. [202]

    Kamionkowski and A

    M. Kamionkowski and A. Mathur, Thermo-Coupled Early Dark Energy, arXiv:2411.09747 [hep-ph] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  195. [203]

    Antypas et al

    D. Antypas et al. , New Horizons: Scalar and Vector Ultralight Dark Matter, arXiv:2203.14915 [hep-ex] (2022)

    2022

  196. [204]

    V. V. Flambaum, Enhanced effect of temporal variation of the fine structure constant and the strong interaction in Th-229, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 092502 (2006), arXiv:physics/0601034

    2006 arXiv

  197. [205]

    C. J. Campbell, A. G. Radnaev, A. Kuzmich, V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, and A. Derevianko, A Single-Ion Nuclear Clock for Metrology at the 19th Decimal Place, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120802 (2012), arXiv:1110.2490 [physics.atom-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  198. [206]

    E. Peik, T. Schumm, M. S. Safronova, A. P´ alffy, J. Weitenberg, and P. G. Thirolf, Nuclear clocks for testing fundamental physics, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 034002 (2021), arXiv:2012.09304 [quant-ph]. 62

    2021 arXiv

  199. [207]

    Brzeminski, Z

    D. Brzeminski, Z. Chacko, A. Dev, I. Flood, and A. Hook, Searching for a fifth force with atomic and nuclear clocks, Phys. Rev. D 106, 095031 (2022), arXiv:2207.14310 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  200. [208]

    K. N. Abazajian et al. (CMB-S4), CMB-S4 Science Book, First Edition, arXiv:1610.02743 [astro-ph.CO] (2016)

    2016 arXiv

  201. [209]

    Ade et al

    P. Ade et al. (Simons Observatory), The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts, JCAP 02, 056, arXiv:1808.07445 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  202. [210]

    Hart and J

    L. Hart and J. Chluba, Using the cosmological recombination radiation to probe early dark energy and fundamental constant variations, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 519, 3664 (2023), arXiv:2209.12290 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  203. [211]

    Hamaide, H

    L. Hamaide, H. M¨ uller, and D. J. E. Marsh, Searching for dilaton fields in the Lyman- α forest, Phys. Rev. D 106, 123509 (2022), arXiv:2210.03705 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  204. [212]

    C. J. A. P. Martins et al. (ANDES), Cosmology and fundamental physics with the ELT-ANDES spectrograph, Exper. Astron. 57, 5 (2024), arXiv:2311.16274 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  205. [213]

    Jiang et al

    L. Jiang et al. (DESI), Constraints on the Spacetime Variation of the Fine-structure Constant Using DESI Emission-line Galaxies, Astrophys. J. 968, 120 (2024), arXiv:2404.03123 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  206. [214]

    Aghamousa et al

    A. Aghamousa et al. (DESI), The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design, arXiv:1611.00036 [astro-ph.IM] (2016)

    2016 arXiv

  207. [215]

    D. J. Schlegel et al. (DESI), A Spectroscopic Road Map for Cosmic Frontier: DESI, DESI-II, Stage-5, arXiv:2209.03585 [astro-ph.CO] (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  208. [216]

    Mellier et al

    Y. Mellier et al. (Euclid), Euclid. I. Overview of the Euclid mission, arXiv:2405.13491 [astro-ph.CO] (2024)

    2024

  209. [217]

    Archidiacono et al

    M. Archidiacono et al. (Euclid), Euclid preparation. LIV. Sensitivity to neutrino parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 693, A58 (2025), arXiv:2405.06047 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  210. [218]

    Eifler et al

    T. Eifler et al. , Cosmology with the Roman Space Telescope – multiprobe strategies, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 507, 1746 (2021), arXiv:2004.05271 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  211. [219]

    Rigault et al

    M. Rigault et al. , ZTF SN Ia DR2: Overview, arXiv:2409.04346 [astro-ph.CO] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  212. [220]

    Mandelbaum et al

    R. Mandelbaum et al. (LSST Dark Energy Science), The LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration (DESC) Science Requirements Document, arXiv:1809.01669 [astro-ph.CO] (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  213. [221]

    D. O. Jones et al. (Young Supernova Experiment), The Young Supernova Experiment: Survey Goals, Overview, and Operations, Astrophys. J. 908, 143 (2021), arXiv:2010.09724 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021 arXiv

  214. [222]

    Foreman-Mackey, D

    D. Foreman-Mackey, D. W. Hogg, D. Lang, and J. Goodman, emcee: The MCMC Hammer, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 125, 306 (2013), arXiv:1202.3665 [astro-ph.IM]

    2013 arXiv

  215. [223]

    D. W. Hogg and D. Foreman-Mackey, Data analysis recipes: Using Markov Chain Monte Carlo, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 236, 11 (2018), arXiv:1710.06068 [astro-ph.IM]

    2018 arXiv

  216. [224]

    Foreman-Mackey, W

    D. Foreman-Mackey, W. Farr, M. Sinha, A. Archibald, D. Hogg, J. Sanders, J. Zuntz, P. Williams, A. Nelson, M. de Val-Borro, T. Erhardt, I. Pashchenko, and O. Pla, Emcee v3: A Python ensemble sampling toolkit for affine-invariant MCMC, Journal of Open Source Software 4, 1864 (2019)

    2019

  217. [225]

    Foreman-Mackey, corner.py: Scatterplot matrices in python, Journal of Open Source Software 1, 24 (2016)

    D. Foreman-Mackey, corner.py: Scatterplot matrices in python, Journal of Open Source Software 1, 24 (2016)

    2016

  218. [226]

    C. R. Harris et al. , Array programming with NumPy, Nature 585, 357 (2020), arXiv:2006.10256 [cs.MS]

    2020 arXiv

  219. [227]

    Virtanen et al

    P. Virtanen et al. , SciPy 1.0–Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python, Nature Meth. 17, 261 (2020), arXiv:1907.10121 [cs.MS]

    2020 arXiv

  220. [228]

    J. D. Hunter, Matplotlib: A 2D Graphics Environment, Comput. Sci. Eng. 9, 90 (2007)

    2007

  221. [229]

    Hoyer and J

    S. Hoyer and J. Hamman, xarray: N-D labeled arrays and datasets in Python, Journal of Open Research Software 5, 10.5334/jors.148 (2017)

    2017 doi

  222. [230]

    Kumar, C

    R. Kumar, C. Carroll, A. Hartikainen, and O. Martin, Arviz a unified library for exploratory analysis of bayesian models in python, Journal of Open Source Software 4, 1143 (2019)

    2019

  223. [231]

    Meurer et al

    A. Meurer et al. , SymPy: symbolic computing in Python, PeerJ Comput. Sci. 3, e103 (2017)

    2017

  224. [232]

    E. van der Velden, CMasher: Scientific colormaps for making accessible, informative and ’cmashing’ plots, The Journal of Open Source Software 5, 2004 (2020), arXiv:2003.01069 [eess.IV]

    2020 arXiv

  225. [233]

    A. A. Starobinsky and J. Yokoyama, Equilibrium state of a selfinteracting scalar field in the De Sitter background, Phys. Rev. D 50, 6357 (1994), arXiv:astro-ph/9407016

    1994 arXiv

  226. [234]

    J. C. Hill, E. McDonough, M. W. Toomey, and S. Alexander, Early dark energy does not restore cosmological concordance, Phys. Rev. D 102, 043507 (2020), arXiv:2003.07355 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.