Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Constraints on Dark Energy Models Using Late Universe Probes

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that late-universe geometric and distance probes alone cannot distinguish constant dark energy from five time-varying parameterizations, and that the DESI dynamical dark energy preference is driven entirely by two BAO…

desk verdict Useful late-Universe dark energy comparison, but the EXP parameterization is mis-implemented in Eq. (8) and the 'all parameterizations' claim is not supported as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.12709 v3 pith:4S7Z73KU submitted 2025-06-15 astro-ph.CO

Shubham Barua , Shantanu Desai This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO PACS 95.36.+x98.80.Es
keywords darkenergyequationofstatedynamicalDESIBAOPantheonPlussupernovaequasarstandardizabilityBayesianmodelcomparisoncosmicchronometersmegamaserdistances
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 tests whether the late universe alone can sustain the hint of dynamical dark energy reported by DESI. It fits six dark energy models—Lambda CDM and five parameterizations in which the equation-of-state $w(a)$ varies with scale factor—to PantheonPlus supernovae, DESI DR1 BAO distances, C IV quasars, and either cosmic-chronometer or megamaser measurements of the expansion rate. Across every model, curvature choice, dataset combination, and prior, the recovered $(w_0, w_a)$ lies within $1{-}2\sigma$ of $(-1, 0)$, and Bayesian evidence prefers Lambda CDM. Removing the DESI LRG1 and LRG2 BAO points erases the small deviations, confirming those two points as the source of the dynamical dark energy preference. The paper's case matters because it shows that the DESI dynamical dark energy signal is not independently supported by late-universe geometric probes alone.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the dark energy equation-of-state parameterization $w(a)$ inserted into the Friedmann expansion history via $f_{DE}(z)=\Omega_{DE}\exp(3\int_0^z \frac{1+w(z')}{1+z'}\,dz')$, with each model supplying a different functional form (CPL: $w_0 + w_a(1-a)$; BA, JBP, EXP, and TDE variants). The distances predicted from each $w(a)$ are compared with SNe Ia distance moduli, DESI BAO distance ratios $D_M/r_d$, $D_H/r_d$, and $D_V/r_d$, quasar luminosities through the C IV R-L relation, and $H(z)$ from cosmic chronometers or angular-diameter distances from megamaser hosts. Parameter estimation and model comparison run through a joint likelihood with Bayesian evidence ratios, so the same pipeline that scores each model also quantifies whether the extra parameters are justified. The load-bearing identity is the standard relation between $w(z)$ and the expansion history: it is what converts every probe into a constraint on $(w_0, w_a)$.

What would settle it

A concrete test would be to re-fit the joint model with the QSO likelihood removed and compare the resulting $(w_0, w_a)$ contours: if they move by more than the reported $1{-}2\sigma$ band, the quasar standardizability assumption is doing real work in the result. Alternatively, an independent calibration of the C IV R-L relation from low-redshift reverberation-mapped AGN with geometric distances, or a demonstration that its slope $\gamma_c$ evolves with redshift, would settle whether the QSO distances are cosmology-independent.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that with only late-universe probes—no CMB—the data cannot tell constant dark energy apart from a time-varying equation of state in any of the five parameterizations considered (CPL, BA, JBP, EXP, TDE). For all fits, $w_0$ and $w_a$ stay within $1{-}2\sigma$ of the Lambda CDM values $(-1, 0)$, the curvature parameter stays consistent with flatness, and the Bayes factor favors Lambda CDM from 'strong' to 'very strong' depending on dataset. The few cases where $w_0$ deviates by about $2\sigma$ (flat BA with LRG points, for instance) fall back within $1\sigma$ once LRG1 and LRG2 are excluded. The paper's conclusion is that the DESI dynamical dark energy indication is driven by two specific BAO measurements, not by a general preference of late-universe data for evolving dark energy.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis depends on the claim that the C IV quasar radius-luminosity relation is a standardizable distance indicator independent of cosmology; if that relation is biased or its scatter is underestimated, the joint $(w_0, w_a)$ constraints would shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claims are right, the DESI dynamical dark energy signal at $(2.5-3.9)\sigma$ requires the combination with CMB data; late-universe-only analyses do not reproduce it.
  • Removing LRG1 and LRG2 from any BAO-based fit should push $w_0$ back toward $-1$ and weaken evidence for CPL, BA, and JBP.
  • The EXP and TDE parameterizations, which reduce to CPL at first order or add a transition, remain fully consistent with $\Lambda$CDM, suggesting higher-order terms absorb the apparent $w_0$ deviation.
  • Bayesian evidence across all four dataset combinations ranks $\Lambda$CDM first, so adding curvature or extra parameters is not rewarded by these data.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next test is to redo the analysis with DESI DR2 BAO: the paper's note added predicts no major change, so a large shift would flag a systematic difference between DR1 and DR2 rather than a dark-energy signal.
  • The same pipeline could be applied to the QSO sample while dropping the $z<0.1$ or $z>2$ subsets to test whether the C IV R-L standardizability assumption, rather than cosmology, drives the joint constraints.
  • Because the Bayes factor penalizes the extra parameters of dynamical models, the reported preference for $\Lambda$CDM partly encodes prior volume; a different prior on $w_a$ (e.g., a physical prior excluding phantom crossing) could shift the model ranking.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper uses late-universe observations only (DESI DR1 BAO, PantheonPlus SNe Ia, quasar time delays, and either cosmic chronometers or megamasers) to constrain six dark energy models: LCDM, CPL, BA, JBP, EXP, and TDE. For each model it considers flat and non-flat geometries, with and without the LRG1 and LRG2 BAO points, and two choices of priors on the SNe absolute magnitude and sound horizon. The central claims are that all parameterizations give w0 and wa within 1-2 sigma of LCDM, that Bayesian evidence favors LCDM over the dynamical models, and that removing LRG1 and LRG2 reduces the apparent preference for dynamical dark energy. The analysis follows standard Bayesian parameter-estimation and nested-sampling practice, but the EXP model is implemented through an incorrect analytic Friedmann equation, which affects every EXP result in the paper.

Significance. If the results survive correction, the paper is a useful, incremental cross-check of the DESI DR1 preference for dynamical dark energy, using only geometric and expansion probes and comparing several parameterizations with uniform and Gaussian priors. Its strengths are the systematic treatment of dataset combinations, explicit likelihood equations, full reporting of posterior tables, and the use of Bayes factors rather than information-theoretic approximations. The main limitation is that one of the six models, EXP, is implemented with an algebraic error in Eq. (8), so the abstract's 'across all parameterizations' statement is not supported as written. The paper does not release code or posterior samples, which would materially help independent checks of the quoted numbers. Overall, the study is valuable but incremental, and its central conclusions are currently only partially supported.

major comments (2)
  1. [II, Eq. (8)] The Friedmann equation quoted for the EXP parameterization does not follow from the stated equation of state. With w(z)=w0+wa[z/(1+z)+(1/2)(z/(1+z))^2], Eq. (3) gives fDE(z)=Omega_DE (1+z)^{3(1+w0+3wa/2)} exp[-(9/2)wa z/(1+z)-(3/4)wa(z/(1+z))^2]. Equation (8), after collecting the powers of (1+z), has an exponential with -6wa z/(1+z)+(3/4)wa(z/(1+z))^2, which differs in both the linear and quadratic coefficients. At z=1, w0=-1, wa=1, Omega_DE=1, the direct integration of Eq. (3) gives fDE about 1.98, while Eq. (8) gives about 1.36, roughly a 30 percent difference. Since the EXP rows in Tables 5-20 and Figures 9, 10, and 16 are produced from Eq. (8), all EXP constraints and the abstract's 'across all parameterizations' claim are unsupported as written. The derivation should be redone, Eq. (8) corrected, and all EXP fits rerun, with a check that the corrected model is the one used in the code.
  2. [III D and V, Eqs. (23)-(27) and (29)] The quasar sample enters every 'Base' dataset combination, and the resulting (w0, wa) constraints therefore rely on two adopted but untested assumptions: that the C IV reverberation-mapped R-L relation is a cosmology-independent standardizable distance indicator, and that the asymmetric time-delay and angular-distance errors can be symmetrized with the ad hoc formula (29). Both assumptions are taken from Cao et al. (2022) without an internal robustness test. Because a bias in the R-L slope or intercept, or in the symmetrization procedure, would propagate into all reported fits, the authors should add at least one check, for example repeating a central analysis (say flat CPL with Base+CC) without the quasar sample, or comparing Eq. (29) with a full two-sided asymmetric likelihood for the quasar and megamaser data, and reporting whether the 1-2 sigma conclusion changes.
minor comments (5)
  1. [III E, Eqs. (11)-(13)] In Eq. (13) the second factor is labelled L_v but should be L_D. In addition, Table 4 lists priors for H0, Omega_m, etc., but not for the megamaser peculiar velocities v_i, which are treated as free parameters in the likelihood; the priors on v_i should be stated.
  2. [V, Tables 21-24] The Bayes factors are quoted without any estimate of the sampling uncertainty in the Nautilus evidence values. Several flat-versus-nonflat ratios are of order 2-3, where such noise could matter; reporting the uncertainty on ln Z, or at least on the quoted ratios, would make the 'no preference' statements more robust.
  3. [VI F and Abstract] The abstract's phrase 'within (1-2)sigma' covers a wide range of tensions: CPL, BA, and JBP show roughly 1.5-2 sigma deviations in w0, while EXP and TDE are consistent with LCDM at less than 1 sigma. The wording should make clear that the strength of the deviation is model-dependent rather than uniform.
  4. [General] The manuscript does not release code, likelihood implementations, or posterior chains. Since all data are public, providing the Nautilus configuration and the likelihood would greatly improve reproducibility and would also allow readers to verify whether the corrected EXP equation was used in the numerical runs.
  5. [General] There are several typographical issues: 'Kaas and Raftery' should be 'Kass and Raftery', 'Chandrashekhar' should be 'Chandrasekhar', and 'DRI' in Section VIII should be 'DR1'. The tables also lack captions and the column headers are not self-explanatory, particularly for Tables 5-20.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the paper is a parameter-fitting analysis against external public datasets with no prediction that reduces to its inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central results—constraints on w0 and wa across six dark energy parameterizations, null findings for spatial curvature, and Bayesian preference for ΛCDM—are derived by fitting externally published data (PantheonPlus SNe Ia, DESI DR1 BAO, C IV reverberation-mapped quasars, cosmic chronometers or megamasers) using explicit likelihoods in Eqs. (18), (25)–(28). None of the reported (w0, wa) posteriors are fitted inputs renamed as predictions; they are outputs of the stated likelihood and priors. The conclusion that LRG1 and LRG2 are the drivers of dynamical dark energy is a dataset-subset comparison whose motivation is explicitly attributed to prior external work in Refs. [108–110] and [95], not to the present fits, so it is not circular. The few self-citations are not load-bearing: Ref. [154] is cited only for following the megamaser likelihood construction of Pesce et al. [152], and Ref. [43] appears in a general list of tension-related works. The assumption that the C IV R-L relation is standardizable is imported from Cao et al. [92] as an external stated premise; whether that assumption is robust is a validity concern, not a circular-derivation concern. The apparent mismatch between Eqs. (3) and (8) for the EXP parameterization is an internal algebraic/model-implementation issue: Eq. (8) is not equivalent to Eq. (3) by construction, nor does the paper define the model in terms of the results it claims. Therefore no enumerated circularity pattern is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard cosmological background assumptions plus the adopted distance indicators (SNe, BAO, QSOs, CC, MM). The main free parameters are the cosmological and nuisance parameters listed in Table 4. No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced. The most fragile external assumptions are the QSO standardizability and the megamaser peculiar velocity model.

free parameters (10)
  • H0 = 73.02 +/- 0.84 (flat Lambda CDM, Gaussian M, Base+CC)
    Hubble constant fitted with uniform prior U(50,200) km/s/Mpc; values vary slightly by dataset and prior.
  • Omega_m = 0.305 +/- 0.011 (flat Lambda CDM, Gaussian M, Base+CC)
    Matter density fitted with uniform prior U(0,1).
  • Omega_k = 0.074 +/- 0.075 (non-flat Lambda CDM, Base+CC)
    Curvature parameter fitted with U(-0.5,0.5) in non-flat models.
  • w0 = varies; e.g., CPL -0.87 +/- 0.08, BA -0.88 +/- 0.06, JBP -0.87 +/- 0.09
    Present-day dark energy equation of state fitted with U(-3,2); central claim is its consistency with -1.
  • wa = varies; e.g., CPL -0.34 +/- 0.7, BA -0.25 +/- 0.33
    Dark energy equation of state slope fitted with U(-3,2); mostly unconstrained.
  • M (SNe absolute magnitude) = N(-19.253, 0.027) (Gaussian) or U(-21,-18) (uniform)
    SNe absolute magnitude fitted or constrained by prior; Gaussian case anchors the distance ladder.
  • r_d (sound horizon) = U(0,200)
    Sound horizon fitted with wide uniform prior in the BAO likelihood; poorly constrained by late data.
  • QSO R-L nuisance params (beta_c, gamma_c, sigma_int) = values not tabulated individually; priors U(0,5), U(0,10), U(0,5)
    Nuisance parameters in the quasar R-L likelihood (Eq. 23-27); reported similar across models.
  • z_T, Delta_z (TDE transition) = z_T ~4.6-4.8, Delta_z ~5.4
    TDE model transition redshift and width with priors U(0,10); posteriors are broad and poorly constrained.
  • Megamaser peculiar velocities (v_i) = six nuisance parameters, not tabulated
    Peculiar velocities of megamaser host galaxies fitted in Eq. 12, with additional sigma_pec = 250 km/s.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math FLRW metric and Friedmann equations with a dark energy term (Eq. 1-3)
    Background geometry assumed throughout the analysis.
  • domain assumption Radiation density is negligible in the late universe (Eq. 2)
    Dropping the radiation term in H(z) is standard at low redshift.
  • standard math Distance duality relation D_L = (1+z)^2 D_A (Eq. 21)
    Follows from photon conservation and metric gravity; used to relate BAO and SNe distances.
  • domain assumption Quasar C IV R-L relation is standardizable and cosmology-independent (Eq. 23-27)
    Adopted from Cao et al. 2022; underlies the QSO likelihood; not validated in this paper.
  • domain assumption Cosmic chronometer ages trace the differential age of the universe in 'red and dead' galaxies (Sec III C)
    Assumes passive evolution; used for the 32 H(z) measurements.
  • domain assumption Megamaser peculiar velocity model with sigma_pec = 250 km/s (Sec III E)
    Accounts for unknown peculiar velocities in megamaser distances.
  • domain assumption The chosen parametric forms for w(z) (CPL, BA, JBP, EXP, TDE) represent the true low-redshift dark energy models (Sec II)
    The analysis only explores these specific functional forms, not a general w(z).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Constraints on Dark Energy Models Using Late Universe Probes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4S7Z73KU

@misc{pith2026250612709,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Constraints on Dark Energy Models Using Late Universe Probes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4S7Z73KU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.12709}
}
abstract

We use late Universe probes - Type Ia Supernovae from the PantheonPlus compilation, Quasars, and Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) Data Release 1 (DR1) BAO data - along with Cosmic Chronometers or Megamasers to constrain various dark energy parameterizations. These include the standard $\Lambda$CDM model ($w_0=-1,w_a=0$), as well as the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder (CPL), Barboza-Alcaniz (BA), Jassal-Bagla-Padmanabhan (JBP), Exponential (EXP), and Transitional Dark Energy (TDE) parameterizations. We find that across all parameterizations, the constrained values of $w_0$ and $w_a$ remain within $(1-2)\sigma$ of the standard $\Lambda$CDM model, irrespective of spatial curvature, dataset combinations, or prior choices. We find from Bayesian model comparison that $\Lambda$CDM remains the most favored model for both flat and non-flat cases, with results remaining robust under different priors. Across all dataset combinations, we reaffirm the fact that LRG1 and LRG2 data points from the DESI BAO dataset are responsible for driving the preference for dynamical dark energy.

Discussion (0). Sign in 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. Updated observational constraints on $\phi$CDM dynamical dark energy cosmological models

    astro-ph.CO 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    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.

  2. Alleviating the $H_0$ tension through the interacting dark energy model from quantum gravitational field theory in light of DESI DR2

    astro-ph.CO 2025-10 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    With DESI DR2 BAO plus CMB and a SH0ES prior, the two-parameter eeΛCDM model gives δΛ=-0.41±0.14 and H0=71.9±1.0, easing the Hubble tension to 0.8σ, but SN datasets erase the signal.

  3. Cosmological preference for a positive neutrino mass at 2.7$\sigma$: A joint analysis of DESI DR2, DESY5, and DESY1 data

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

    A joint fit of DESI DR2, CMB, DESY5 and DESY1 data gives total neutrino mass 0.098 (+0.016, -0.037) eV, a 2.7 sigma preference for positive mass in the w0waCDM model.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

181 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Including SNe Ia data, namely PantheonPlus compilation, decreases w0 to −0.827 ± 0.063 [86]

    CPL Parameterization • As discussed in [86] and [173], CMB + DESI gives a value of w0 = −0.44+0.34 −0.21 and wa = −1.79+0.48 −1.0 . Including SNe Ia data, namely PantheonPlus compilation, decreases w0 to −0.827 ± 0.063 [86]. These results are also reflected in our study even though we do not use CMB data. However, wa values are considerably larger ( ≳ 1.2...

  2. [2]

    • Zheng et al

    BA Parameterization • With respect to [173], the w0 and wa values are very much consistent with their Planck+DESI+PantheonPlus results, even though we do not use Planck CMB data. • Zheng et al. [95] found that removing LRG1 and LRG2 data points makes the BA parameterization more consistent with the ΛCDM model. We find similar results following the trend o...

  3. [3]

    • Similar to BA parameterization, the central value of wa is consistent within 1 σ with out results

    JBP Parameterization • Similar to the CPL and the BA parameterization, our results agree with the w0 value estimated in [173] ( w0 = −0.767 ± 0.086) within 1 σ from Planck+DESI+PantheonPlus dataset combination. • Similar to BA parameterization, the central value of wa is consistent within 1 σ with out results. • Comparing with [95], BAO+SNe Ia+QSO in thei...

  4. [4]

    PARAM SEV A

    EXP Parameterization • Our w0 values are consistent with those estimated in [173] to within ∼ 1σ. On the other hand wa values are discrepant with a significance ≥ 2σ. VII. COMP ARISON OF w(z) WITH DESI RESUL TS In this section, we investigate the behavior of the dark energy equation of state, w(z), across various parameterizations (CPL, BA, JBP, EXP, and ...

  5. [5]

    A. G. Riess, A. V. Filippenko, P. Challis, A. Clocchiatti, A. Diercks, P. M. Garnavich, R. L. Gilliland, C. J. Hogan, S. Jha, R. P. Kirshner, et al., Astron. J. 116, 1009 (1998), astro-ph/9805201

    arXiv 1998

  6. [6]

    Perlmutter, G

    S. Perlmutter, G. Aldering, G. Goldhaber, R. A. Knop, P. Nugent, P. G. Castro, S. Deustua, S. Fabbro, A. Goobar, D. E. Groom, et al., Astrophys. J. 517, 565 (1999), astro-ph/9812133

    arXiv 1999

  7. [7]

    Tegmark, M

    M. Tegmark, M. A. Strauss, M. R. Blanton, K. Abazajian, S. Dodelson, H. Sandvik, X. Wang, D. H. Weinberg, I. Zehavi, N. A. Bahcall, et al., Phys. Rev. D 69, 103501 (2004), astro-ph/0310723

    arXiv 2004

  8. [9]

    Scranton, A

    R. Scranton, A. J. Connolly, R. C. Nichol, A. Stebbins, I. Szapudi, D. J. Eisenstein, N. Afshordi, T. Budavari, I. Csabai, J. A. Frieman, et al., arXiv e-prints astro-ph/0307335 (2003), astro-ph/0307335

    arXiv 2003

Show all 181 references
  1. [10]

    J. L. Tonry, B. P. Schmidt, B. Barris, P. Candia, P. Challis, A. Clocchiatti, A. L. Coil, A. V. Filippenko, P. Garnavich, C. Hogan, et al., Astrophys. J. 594, 1 (2003), astro-ph/0305008

    2003 arXiv

  2. [11]

    R. A. Knop, G. Aldering, R. Amanullah, P. Astier, G. Blanc, M. S. Burns, A. Conley, S. E. Deustua, M. Doi, R. Ellis, et al., Astrophys. J. 598, 102 (2003), astro-ph/0309368

    2003 arXiv

  3. [12]

    B. Feng, X. Wang, and X. Zhang, Physics Letters B 607, 35 (2005), astro-ph/0404224

    2005 arXiv

  4. [13]

    Astier, J

    P. Astier, J. Guy, N. Regnault, R. Pain, E. Aubourg, D. Balam, S. Basa, R. G. Carlberg, S. Fabbro, D. Fouchez, et al., Astron. & Astrophys. 447, 31 (2006), astro-ph/0510447

    2006 arXiv

  5. [14]

    D. J. Eisenstein, I. Zehavi, D. W. Hogg, R. Scoccimarro, M. R. Blanton, R. C. Nichol, R. Scranton, H.-J. Seo, M. Tegmark, Z. Zheng, et al., Astrophys. J. 633, 560 (2005), astro-ph/0501171

    2005 arXiv

  6. [15]

    D. J. Eisenstein, H.-J. Seo, E. Sirko, and D. N. Spergel, Astrophys. J. 664, 675 (2007), astro-ph/0604362

    2007 arXiv

  7. [16]

    Tegmark, D

    M. Tegmark, D. J. Eisenstein, M. A. Strauss, D. H. Weinberg, M. R. Blanton, J. A. Frieman, M. Fukugita, J. E. Gunn, A. J. S. Hamilton, G. R. Knapp, et al., Phys. Rev. D 74, 123507 (2006), astro-ph/0608632

    2006 arXiv

  8. [17]

    Sahni and A

    V. Sahni and A. Starobinsky, International Journal of Modern Physics D 15, 2105 (2006), astro-ph/0610026

    2006 arXiv

  9. [18]

    W. M. Wood-Vasey, G. Miknaitis, C. W. Stubbs, S. Jha, A. G. Riess, P. M. Garnavich, R. P. Kirshner, C. Aguilera, A. C. Becker, J. W. Blackman, et al., Astrophys. J. 666, 694 (2007), astro-ph/0701041

    2007 arXiv

  10. [19]

    Vikhlinin, A

    A. Vikhlinin, A. V. Kravtsov, R. A. Burenin, H. Ebeling, W. R. Forman, A. Hornstrup, C. Jones, S. S. Murray, D. Nagai, H. Quintana, et al., Astrophys. J. 692, 1060 (2009), 0812.2720

    2009 arXiv

  11. [20]

    Stern, R

    D. Stern, R. Jimenez, L. Verde, M. Kamionkowski, and S. A. Stanford, JCAP 2010, 008 (2010), 0907.3149

    2010 arXiv

  12. [21]

    B. D. Sherwin, J. Dunkley, S. Das, J. W. Appel, J. R. Bond, C. S. Carvalho, M. J. Devlin, R. D¨ unner, T. Essinger-Hileman, J. W. Fowler, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 021302 (2011), 1105.0419

    2011 arXiv

  13. [22]

    C. L. Bennett, D. Larson, J. L. Weiland, N. Jarosik, G. Hinshaw, N. Odegard, K. M. Smith, R. S. Hill, B. Gold, M. Halpern, et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 208, 20 (2013), 1212.5225

    2013 arXiv

  14. [23]

    Hinshaw, D

    G. Hinshaw, D. Larson, E. Komatsu, D. N. Spergel, C. L. Bennett, J. Dunkley, M. R. Nolta, M. Halpern, R. S. Hill, N. Odegard, et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 208, 19 (2013), 1212.5226

    2013 arXiv

  15. [24]

    K. S. Dawson, D. J. Schlegel, C. P. Ahn, S. F. Anderson, ´E. Aubourg, S. Bailey, R. H. Barkhouser, J. E. Bautista, A. Beifiori, A. A. Berlind, et al., Astron. J. 145, 10 (2013), 1208.0022

    2013 arXiv

  16. [25]

    J. T. A. de Jong, G. A. Verdoes Kleijn, K. H. Kuijken, and E. A. Valentijn, Experimental Astronomy 35, 25 (2013), 1206.1254

    2013 arXiv

  17. [26]

    Anderson, ´E

    L. Anderson, ´E. Aubourg, S. Bailey, F. Beutler, V. Bhardwaj, M. Blanton, A. S. Bolton, J. Brinkmann, J. R. Brownstein, A. Burden, et al., MNRAS 441, 24 (2014), 1312.4877

    2014 arXiv

  18. [27]

    D. H. Weinberg, M. J. Mortonson, D. J. Eisenstein, C. Hirata, A. G. Riess, and E. Rozo, Physics Reports 530, 87 (2013), 1201.2434

    2013 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Beutler, S

    F. Beutler, S. Saito, H.-J. Seo, J. Brinkmann, K. S. Dawson, D. J. Eisenstein, A. Font-Ribera, S. Ho, C. K. McBride, F. Montesano, et al., MNRAS 443, 1065 (2014), 1312.4611

    2014 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Delubac, J

    T. Delubac, J. E. Bautista, N. G. Busca, J. Rich, D. Kirkby, S. Bailey, A. Font-Ribera, A. Slosar, K.-G. Lee, M. M. Pieri, et al., Astron. & Astrophys. 574, A59 (2015), 1404.1801

    2015 arXiv

  21. [30]

    Abbott, F

    Dark Energy Survey Collaboration, T. Abbott, F. B. Abdalla, J. Aleksi´ c, S. Allam, A. Amara, D. Bacon, E. Balbinot, M. Banerji, K. Bechtol, et al., MNRAS 460, 1270 (2016), 1601.00329

    2016 arXiv

  22. [31]

    B. S. Haridasu, V. V. Lukovi´ c, R. D’Agostino, and N. Vittorio, Astron. & Astrophys. 600, L1 (2017), 1702.08244

    2017 arXiv

  23. [32]

    Huterer and D

    D. Huterer and D. L. Shafer, Reports on Progress in Physics 81, 016901 (2018), 1709.01091

    2018 arXiv

  24. [33]

    M. A. Troxel, N. MacCrann, J. Zuntz, T. F. Eifler, E. Krause, S. Dodelson, D. Gruen, J. Blazek, O. Friedrich, S. Samuroff, et al., Phys. Rev. D 98, 043528 (2018), 1708.01538

    2018 arXiv

  25. [35]

    Aghanim, Y

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, F. Arroja, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, M. Ballardini, A. J. Banday, R. B. Barreiro, et al., Astron. & Astrophys. 641, A1 (2020), 1807.06205

    2020 arXiv

  26. [36]

    Aghanim, Y

    Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, M. Ballardini, A. J. Banday, R. B. Barreiro, N. Bartolo, et al., Astron. & Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020), 1807.06209

    2020 arXiv

  27. [37]

    G´ omez-Valent, JCAP2019, 026 (2019), 1810.02278

    A. G´ omez-Valent, JCAP2019, 026 (2019), 1810.02278

    2019 arXiv

  28. [38]

    Yang and Y

    Y. Yang and Y. Gong, JCAP 2020, 059 (2020), 1912.07375

    2020 arXiv

  29. [39]

    Scolnic, D

    D. Scolnic, D. Brout, A. Carr, A. G. Riess, T. M. Davis, A. Dwomoh, D. O. Jones, N. Ali, P. Charvu, R. Chen, et al., Astrophys. J. 938, 113 (2022), 2112.03863. 26

    2022 arXiv

  30. [40]

    Brout, D

    D. Brout, D. Scolnic, B. Popovic, A. G. Riess, A. Carr, J. Zuntz, R. Kessler, T. M. Davis, S. Hinton, D. Jones, et al., Astrophys. J. 938, 110 (2022), 2202.04077

    2022 arXiv

  31. [41]

    K. C. Wong, S. H. Suyu, M. W. Auger, V. Bonvin, F. Courbin, C. D. Fassnacht, A. Halkola, C. E. Rusu, D. Sluse, A. Sonnenfeld, et al., MNRAS 465, 4895 (2017), 1607.01403

    2017 arXiv

  32. [42]

    K. C. Wong, S. H. Suyu, G. C. F. Chen, C. E. Rusu, M. Millon, D. Sluse, V. Bonvin, C. D. Fassnacht, S. Taubenberger, M. W. Auger, et al., MNRAS 498, 1420 (2020), 1907.04869

    2020 arXiv

  33. [43]

    Di Valentino, O

    E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Melchiorri, D. F. Mota, A. G. Riess, and J. Silk, Classical and Quantum Gravity 38, 153001 (2021), 2103.01183

    2021 arXiv

  34. [44]

    Verde, T

    L. Verde, T. Treu, and A. G. Riess, Nature Astronomy 3, 891 (2019), 1907.10625

    2019 arXiv

  35. [45]

    Abdalla, G

    E. Abdalla, G. F. Abell´ an, A. Aboubrahim, A. Agnello, ¨O. Akarsu, Y. Akrami, G. Alestas, D. Aloni, L. Amendola, L. A. Anchordoqui, et al., Journal of High Energy Astrophysics 34, 49 (2022), 2203.06142

    2022 arXiv

  36. [46]

    Scherer, M

    M. Scherer, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes, and A. De Felice, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2504.20664 (2025), 2504.20664

    2025 arXiv

  37. [47]

    Barua and S

    S. Barua and S. Desai, European Physical Journal C 85, 470 (2025), 2412.19240

    2025 arXiv

  38. [48]

    A. G. Riess, W. Yuan, L. M. Macri, D. Scolnic, D. Brout, S. Casertano, D. O. Jones, Y. Murakami, G. S. Anand, L. Breuval, et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 934, L7 (2022), 2112.04510

    2022 arXiv

  39. [49]

    Knox and M

    L. Knox and M. Millea, Phys. Rev. D 101, 043533 (2020), 1908.03663

    2020 arXiv

  40. [50]

    Poulin, T

    V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, and T. Karwal, Physics of the Dark Universe 42, 101348 (2023), 2302.09032

    2023 arXiv

  41. [51]

    Karwal, M

    T. Karwal, M. Raveri, B. Jain, J. Khoury, and M. Trodden, Phys. Rev. D 105, 063535 (2022), 2106.13290

    2022 arXiv

  42. [52]

    Poulin, T

    V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, T. Karwal, and M. Kamionkowski, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 221301 (2019), 1811.04083

    2019 arXiv

  43. [53]

    K. V. Berghaus and T. Karwal, Phys. Rev. D 101, 083537 (2020), 1911.06281

    2020 arXiv

  44. [54]

    Kamionkowski and A

    M. Kamionkowski and A. G. Riess, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science 73, 153 (2023), 2211.04492

    2023 arXiv

  45. [55]

    Agrawal, F.-Y

    P. Agrawal, F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, D. Pinner, and L. Randall, Physics of the Dark Universe 42, 101347 (2023), 1904.01016

    2023 arXiv

  46. [56]

    Vagnozzi, Universe 9, 393 (2023), 2308.16628

    S. Vagnozzi, Universe 9, 393 (2023), 2308.16628

    2023 arXiv

  47. [57]

    Montani, N

    G. Montani, N. Carlevaro, L. A. Escamilla, and E. Di Valentino, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2404.15977 (2024), 2404.15977

    2024 arXiv

  48. [58]

    Raveri, Phys

    M. Raveri, Phys. Rev. D 101, 083524 (2020), 1902.01366

    2020 arXiv

  49. [59]

    R. E. Keeley, S. Joudaki, M. Kaplinghat, and D. Kirkby, JCAP 2019, 035 (2019), 1905.10198

    2019 arXiv

  50. [60]

    Roy Choudhury and T

    S. Roy Choudhury and T. Okumura, Astrophys. J. Lett. 976, L11 (2024), 2409.13022

    2024 arXiv

  51. [61]

    Sahni and A

    V. Sahni and A. Starobinsky, International Journal of Modern Physics D 9, 373 (2000), astro-ph/9904398

    2000 arXiv

  52. [62]

    S. M. Carroll, Living Reviews in Relativity 4, 1 (2001), astro-ph/0004075

    2001 arXiv

  53. [63]

    P. J. Peebles and B. Ratra, Reviews of Modern Physics 75, 559 (2003), astro-ph/0207347

    2003 arXiv

  54. [64]

    Padmanabhan, Physics Reports 380, 235 (2003), hep-th/0212290

    T. Padmanabhan, Physics Reports 380, 235 (2003), hep-th/0212290

    2003 arXiv

  55. [65]

    E. J. Copeland, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa, International Journal of Modern Physics D 15, 1753 (2006), hep-th/0603057

    2006 arXiv

  56. [66]

    R. R. Caldwell and M. Kamionkowski, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science 59, 397 (2009), 0903.0866

    2009 arXiv

  57. [67]

    Li, X.-D

    M. Li, X.-D. Li, S. Wang, and Y. Wang, Communications in Theoretical Physics 56, 525 (2011), 1103.5870

    2011 arXiv

  58. [68]

    Martin, Comptes Rendus Physique 13, 566 (2012), 1205.3365

    J. Martin, Comptes Rendus Physique 13, 566 (2012), 1205.3365

    2012 arXiv

  59. [69]

    L. M. Krauss and M. S. Turner, General Relativity and Gravitation 27, 1137 (1995), astro-ph/9504003

    1995 arXiv

  60. [70]

    Bamba, S

    K. Bamba, S. Capozziello, S. Nojiri, and S. D. Odintsov, Astrophysics and Space Science 342, 155 (2012), 1205.3421

    2012 arXiv

  61. [71]

    W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, and E. N. Saridakis, Universe 5, 219 (2019), 1811.06932

    2019 arXiv

  62. [72]

    W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, E. N. Saridakis, and S. Chakraborty, Phys. Rev. D 99, 043543 (2019), 1810.05141

    2019 arXiv

  63. [73]

    W. Yang, E. Di Valentino, S. Pan, Y. Wu, and J. Lu, MNRAS 501, 5845 (2021), 2101.02168

    2021 arXiv

  64. [74]

    E. ´O. Colg´ ain, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and L. Yin, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2104.01930 (2021), 2104.01930

    2021 arXiv

  65. [75]

    Mainini, A

    R. Mainini, A. V. Macci` o, S. A. Bonometto, and A. Klypin, Astrophys. J. 599, 24 (2003), astro-ph/0303303

    2003 arXiv

  66. [76]

    U. Alam, V. Sahni, and A. A. Starobinsky, JCAP 2004, 008 (2004), astro-ph/0403687

    2004 arXiv

  67. [77]

    Sol` a and H.ˇStefanˇ ci´ c, Modern Physics Letters A21, 479 (2006), astro-ph/0507110

    J. Sol` a and H.ˇStefanˇ ci´ c, Modern Physics Letters A21, 479 (2006), astro-ph/0507110

    2006 arXiv

  68. [78]

    Sol` a Peracaula, J

    J. Sol` a Peracaula, J. de Cruz P´ erez, and A. G´ omez-Valent, EPL (Europhysics Letters)121, 39001 (2018), 1606.00450

    2018 arXiv

  69. [79]

    Antoniadis, P

    I. Antoniadis, P. O. Mazur, and E. Mottola, New Journal of Physics 9, 11 (2007), gr-qc/0612068

    2007 arXiv

  70. [80]

    G.-B. Zhao, R. G. Crittenden, L. Pogosian, and X. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 171301 (2012), 1207.3804

    2012 arXiv

  71. [81]

    Zhao, Z.-X

    Z.-W. Zhao, Z.-X. Li, J.-Z. Qi, H. Gao, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Astrophys. J. 903, 83 (2020), 2006.01450

    2020 arXiv

  72. [82]

    S. Pan, W. Yang, E. Di Valentino, E. N. Saridakis, and S. Chakraborty, Phys. Rev. D 100, 103520 (2019), 1907.07540

    2019 arXiv

  73. [83]

    Escamilla-Rivera and A

    C. Escamilla-Rivera and A. N´ ajera, JCAP2022, 060 (2022), 2103.02097

    2022 arXiv

  74. [84]

    Li, P.-J

    T.-N. Li, P.-J. Wu, G.-H. Du, S.-J. Jin, H.-L. Li, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Astrophys. J. 976, 1 (2024), 2407.14934

    2024 arXiv

  75. [85]

    S. R. Choudhury, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2504.15340 (2025), 2504.15340

    2025

  76. [86]

    C.-G. Park, J. d. C. P´ erez, and B. Ratra, Phys. Rev. D 110, 123533 (2024), 2405.00502

    2024 arXiv

  77. [87]

    Di Valentino, A

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, E. V. Linder, and J. Silk, Phys. Rev. D 96, 023523 (2017), 1704.00762

    2017 arXiv

  78. [88]

    Di Valentino, W

    E. Di Valentino, W. Giar` e, A. Melchiorri, and J. Silk, Phys. Rev. D 106, 103506 (2022), 2209.12872

    2022 arXiv

  79. [89]

    Di Valentino, A

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, and J. Silk, JCAP 2020, 013 (2020), 1908.01391

    2020 arXiv

  80. [90]

    A. G. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, D. M. Alexander, M. Alvarez, O. Alves, A. Anand, U. Andrade, E. Armengaud, et al., JCAP 2025, 021 (2025), 2404.03002

    2025 arXiv

  81. [91]

    Chevallier and D

    M. Chevallier and D. Polarski, International Journal of Modern Physics D 10, 213 (2001), gr-qc/0009008

    2001 arXiv

  82. [92]

    E. V. Linder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 091301 (2003), astro-ph/0208512

    2003 arXiv

  83. [93]

    E. M. Barboza and J. S. Alcaniz, Physics Letters B 666, 415 (2008), 0805.1713

    2008 arXiv

  84. [94]

    H. K. Jassal, J. S. Bagla, and T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Rev. D 72, 103503 (2005), astro-ph/0506748

    2005 arXiv

  85. [95]

    Najafi, S

    M. Najafi, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, and J. T. Firouzjaee, Physics of the Dark Universe 45, 101539 (2024), 2407.14939

    2024 arXiv

  86. [96]

    S. Cao, M. Zajaˇ cek, S. Panda, M. L. Mart ´ ınez-Aldama, B. Czerny, and B. Ratra, MNRAS516, 1721 (2022), 2205.15552

    2022 arXiv

  87. [97]

    Moresco, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2307.09501 (2023), 2307.09501

    M. Moresco, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2307.09501 (2023), 2307.09501

    2023 arXiv

  88. [98]

    D. W. Pesce, J. A. Braatz, M. J. Reid, J. J. Condon, F. Gao, C. Henkel, C. Y. Kuo, K. Y. Lo, and W. Zhao, Astrophys. J. 890, 27 118 (2020), 2001.04581

    2020 arXiv

  89. [99]

    Zheng, D.-C

    J. Zheng, D.-C. Qiang, and Z.-Q. You, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2412.04830 (2024), 2412.04830

    2024 arXiv

  90. [100]

    Wu, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2504.09054 (2025), 2504.09054

    P.-J. Wu, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2504.09054 (2025), 2504.09054

    2025 arXiv

  91. [101]

    Particle Data Group, P. A. Zyla, R. M. Barnett, J. Beringer, O. Dahl, D. A. Dwyer, D. E. Groom, C. J. Lin, K. S. Lugovsky, E. Pianori, et al., Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics 2020, 083C01 (2020)

    2020

  92. [102]

    W. J. Wolf and P. G. Ferreira, Phys. Rev. D 108, 103519 (2023), 2310.07482

    2023 arXiv

  93. [103]

    S. Pan, W. Yang, and A. Paliathanasis, European Physical Journal C 80, 274 (2020), 1902.07108

    2020 arXiv

  94. [104]

    Dimakis, A

    N. Dimakis, A. Karagiorgos, A. Zampeli, A. Paliathanasis, T. Christodoulakis, and P. A. Terzis, Phys. Rev. D 93, 123518 (2016), 1604.05168

    2016 arXiv

  95. [105]

    W. J. Wolf, C. Garc ´ ıa-Garc ´ ıa, and P. G. Ferreira, JCAP2025, 034 (2025), 2502.04929

    2025 arXiv

  96. [106]

    R. E. Keeley, K. N. Abazajian, M. Kaplinghat, and A. Shafieloo, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2502.12667 (2025), 2502.12667

    2025 arXiv

  97. [107]

    Ruchika, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2406.05453 (2024), 2406.05453

    2024

  98. [108]

    D. J. Eisenstein and W. Hu, Astrophys. J. 496, 605 (1998), astro-ph/9709112

    1998 arXiv

  99. [109]

    R. A. Sunyaev and Y. B. Zeldovich, Comments on Astrophysics and Space Physics 4, 173 (1972)

    1972

  100. [110]

    P. J. E. Peebles and J. T. Yu, Astrophys. J. 162, 815 (1970)

    1970

  101. [111]

    Sutherland, MNRAS 426, 1280 (2012), 1205.0715

    W. Sutherland, MNRAS 426, 1280 (2012), 1205.0715

    2012 arXiv

  102. [112]

    E. ´O. Colg´ ain, M. G. Dainotti, S. Capozziello, S. Pourojaghi, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and D. Stojkovic, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2404.08633 (2024), 2404.08633

    2024 arXiv

  103. [113]

    Z. Wang, S. Lin, Z. Ding, and B. Hu, MNRAS 534, 3869 (2024), 2405.02168

    2024 arXiv

  104. [114]

    G. Liu, Y. Wang, and W. Zhao, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2407.04385 (2024), 2407.04385

    2024 arXiv

  105. [115]

    Ghosh and C

    B. Ghosh and C. Bengaly, Physics of the Dark Universe 46, 101699 (2024), 2408.04432

    2024 arXiv

  106. [116]

    Brout, M

    D. Brout, M. Sako, D. Scolnic, R. Kessler, C. B. D’Andrea, T. M. Davis, S. R. Hinton, A. G. Kim, J. Lasker, E. Macaulay, et al., Astrophys. J. 874, 106 (2019), 1811.02378

    2019 arXiv

  107. [117]

    R. J. Foley, D. Scolnic, A. Rest, S. W. Jha, Y. C. Pan, A. G. Riess, P. Challis, K. C. Chambers, D. A. Coulter, K. G. Dettman, et al., MNRAS 475, 193 (2018), 1711.02474

    2018 arXiv

  108. [118]

    D. M. Scolnic, D. O. Jones, A. Rest, Y. C. Pan, R. Chornock, R. J. Foley, M. E. Huber, R. Kessler, G. Narayan, A. G. Riess, et al., Astrophys. J. 859, 101 (2018), 1710.00845

    2018 arXiv

  109. [119]

    Betoule, R

    M. Betoule, R. Kessler, J. Guy, J. Mosher, D. Hardin, R. Biswas, P. Astier, P. El-Hage, M. Konig, S. Kuhlmann, et al., Astron. & Astrophys. 568, A22 (2014), 1401.4064

    2014 arXiv

  110. [120]

    M. Sako, B. Bassett, B. Connolly, B. Dilday, H. Cambell, J. A. Frieman, L. Gladney, R. Kessler, H. Lampeitl, J. Marriner, et al., Astrophys. J. 738, 162 (2011), 1107.5106

    2011 arXiv

  111. [121]

    A. G. Riess, P. E. Nugent, R. L. Gilliland, B. P. Schmidt, J. Tonry, M. Dickinson, R. I. Thompson, T. Budav´ ari, S. Casertano, A. S. Evans, et al., Astrophys. J. 560, 49 (2001), astro-ph/0104455

    2001 arXiv

  112. [122]

    Suzuki, D

    N. Suzuki, D. Rubin, C. Lidman, G. Aldering, R. Amanullah, K. Barbary, L. F. Barrientos, J. Botyanszki, M. Brodwin, N. Con- nolly, et al., Astrophys. J. 746, 85 (2012), 1105.3470

    2012 arXiv

  113. [123]

    A. G. Riess, S. A. Rodney, D. M. Scolnic, D. L. Shafer, L.-G. Strolger, H. C. Ferguson, M. Postman, O. Graur, D. Maoz, S. W. Jha, et al., Astrophys. J. 853, 126 (2018), 1710.00844

    2018 arXiv

  114. [124]

    A. G. Riess, L.-G. Strolger, J. Tonry, S. Casertano, H. C. Ferguson, B. Mobasher, P. Challis, A. V. Filippenko, S. Jha, W. Li, et al., Astrophys. J. 607, 665 (2004), astro-ph/0402512

    2004 arXiv

  115. [125]

    A. G. Riess, L.-G. Strolger, S. Casertano, H. C. Ferguson, B. Mobasher, B. Gold, P. J. Challis, A. V. Filippenko, S. Jha, W. Li, et al., Astrophys. J. 659, 98 (2007), astro-ph/0611572

    2007 arXiv

  116. [126]

    R. L. Gilliland, P. E. Nugent, and M. M. Phillips, Astrophys. J. 521, 30 (1999), astro-ph/9903229

    1999 arXiv

  117. [127]

    Ganeshalingam, W

    M. Ganeshalingam, W. Li, A. V. Filippenko, C. Anderson, G. Foster, E. L. Gates, C. V. Griffith, B. J. Grigsby, N. Joubert, J. Leja, et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 190, 418 (2010)

    2010

  118. [128]

    B. E. Stahl, W. Zheng, T. de Jaeger, A. V. Filippenko, A. Bigley, K. Blanchard, P. K. Blanchard, T. G. Brink, S. K. Cargill, C. Casper, et al., MNRAS 490, 3882 (2019), 1909.11140

    2019 arXiv

  119. [129]

    P. J. Brown, A. A. Breeveld, S. Holland, P. Kuin, and T. Pritchard, Astrophysics and Space Science 354, 89 (2014), 1407.3808

    2014 arXiv

  120. [130]

    Krisciunas, C

    K. Krisciunas, C. Contreras, C. R. Burns, M. M. Phillips, M. D. Stritzinger, N. Morrell, M. Hamuy, J. Anais, L. Boldt, L. Busta, et al., Astron. J. 154, 211 (2017), 1709.05146

    2017 arXiv

  121. [131]

    A. G. Riess, R. P. Kirshner, B. P. Schmidt, S. Jha, P. Challis, P. M. Garnavich, A. A. Esin, C. Carpenter, R. Grashius, R. E. Schild, et al., Astron. J. 117, 707 (1999), astro-ph/9810291

    1999 arXiv

  122. [132]

    S. Jha, R. P. Kirshner, P. Challis, P. M. Garnavich, T. Matheson, A. M. Soderberg, G. J. M. Graves, M. Hicken, J. F. Alves, H. G. Arce, et al., Astron. J. 131, 527 (2006), astro-ph/0509234

    2006 arXiv

  123. [133]

    Hicken, P

    M. Hicken, P. Challis, S. Jha, R. P. Kirshner, T. Matheson, M. Modjaz, A. Rest, W. M. Wood-Vasey, G. Bakos, E. J. Barton, et al., Astrophys. J. 700, 331 (2009), 0901.4787

    2009 arXiv

  124. [134]

    Hicken, P

    M. Hicken, P. Challis, R. P. Kirshner, A. Rest, C. E. Cramer, W. M. Wood-Vasey, G. Bakos, P. Berlind, W. R. Brown, N. Caldwell, et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 200, 12 (2012), 1205.4493

    2012 arXiv

  125. [135]

    P. Chen, S. Dong, C. S. Kochanek, K. Z. Stanek, R. S. Post, M. D. Stritzinger, J. L. Prieto, A. V. Filippenko, J. A. Kollmeier, N. Elias-Rosa, et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 259, 53 (2022), 2011.02461

    2022 arXiv

  126. [136]

    C. R. Burns, C. Ashall, C. Contreras, P. Brown, M. Stritzinger, M. M. Phillips, R. Flores, N. B. Suntzeff, E. Y. Hsiao, S. Uddin, et al., Astrophys. J. 895, 118 (2020), 2004.13069

    2020 arXiv

  127. [137]

    D. O. Jones, A. G. Riess, D. M. Scolnic, Y. C. Pan, E. Johnson, D. A. Coulter, K. G. Dettman, M. M. Foley, R. J. Foley, M. E. Huber, et al., Astrophys. J. 867, 108 (2018), 1805.05911

    2018 arXiv

  128. [138]

    C. R. Burns, E. Parent, M. M. Phillips, M. Stritzinger, K. Krisciunas, N. B. Suntzeff, E. Y. Hsiao, C. Contreras, J. Anais, L. Boldt, et al., Astrophys. J. 869, 56 (2018), 1809.06381

    2018 arXiv

  129. [139]

    Krisciunas, N

    K. Krisciunas, N. B. Suntzeff, J. Espinoza, D. Gonzalez, A. Miranda, and P. Sanhueza, Research Notes of the American Astro- 28 nomical Society 1, 36 (2017), 1711.10345

    2017 arXiv

  130. [140]

    Stritzinger, C

    M. Stritzinger, C. R. Burns, M. M. Phillips, G. Folatelli, K. Krisciunas, S. Kattner, S. E. Persson, L. Boldt, A. Campillay, C. Contreras, et al., Astron. J. 140, 2036 (2010), 1009.4390

    2010 arXiv

  131. [141]

    C. Gall, M. D. Stritzinger, C. Ashall, E. Baron, C. R. Burns, P. Hoeflich, E. Y. Hsiao, P. A. Mazzali, M. M. Phillips, A. V. Filippenko, et al., Astron. & Astrophys. 611, A58 (2018), 1707.03823

    2018 arXiv

  132. [142]

    Zhang, X

    T. Zhang, X. Wang, W. Li, A. V. Filippenko, L. Wang, X. Zhou, P. J. Brown, J. M. Silverman, T. N. Steele, M. Ganeshalingam, et al., Pub. Astro. Soc. Pac. 122, 1 (2010), 0910.1913

    2010 arXiv

  133. [143]

    D. Y. Tsvetkov and L. Elenin, Peremennye Zvezdy 30, 2 (2010), 1003.2558

    2010 arXiv

  134. [144]

    Kawabata, K

    M. Kawabata, K. Maeda, M. Yamanaka, T. Nakaoka, K. S. Kawabata, R. Adachi, H. Akitaya, U. Burgaz, H. Hanayama, T. Horiuchi, et al., Astrophys. J. 893, 143 (2020), 1908.03001

    2020 arXiv

  135. [145]

    Jimenez and A

    R. Jimenez and A. Loeb, Astrophys. J. 573, 37 (2002), astro-ph/0106145

    2002 arXiv

  136. [146]

    S. I. Loubser, A. B. Alabi, M. Hilton, Y.-Z. Ma, X. Tang, N. Hatamkhani, C. Cress, R. E. Skelton, and S. A. Nkosi, MNRAS (2025), 2506.03836

    2025 arXiv

  137. [147]

    Moresco, A

    M. Moresco, A. Cimatti, R. Jimenez, L. Pozzetti, G. Zamorani, M. Bolzonella, J. Dunlop, F. Lamareille, M. Mignoli, H. Pearce, et al., JCAP 2012, 006 (2012), 1201.3609

    2012 arXiv

  138. [148]

    Moresco, MNRAS 450, L16 (2015), 1503.01116

    M. Moresco, MNRAS 450, L16 (2015), 1503.01116

    2015 arXiv

  139. [149]

    Moresco, L

    M. Moresco, L. Pozzetti, A. Cimatti, R. Jimenez, C. Maraston, L. Verde, D. Thomas, A. Citro, R. Tojeiro, and D. Wilkinson, JCAP 2016, 014 (2016), 1601.01701

    2016 arXiv

  140. [150]

    Moresco, R

    M. Moresco, R. Jimenez, L. Verde, A. Cimatti, and L. Pozzetti, Astrophys. J. 898, 82 (2020), 2003.07362

    2020 arXiv

  141. [151]

    A. L. Ratsimbazafy, S. I. Loubser, S. M. Crawford, C. M. Cress, B. A. Bassett, R. C. Nichol, and P. V¨ ais¨ anen, MNRAS 467, 3239 (2017), 1702.00418

    2017 arXiv

  142. [152]

    Zhang, H

    C. Zhang, H. Zhang, S. Yuan, S. Liu, T.-J. Zhang, and Y.-C. Sun, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics 14, 1221-1233 (2014), 1207.4541

    2014 arXiv

  143. [153]

    Simon, L

    J. Simon, L. Verde, and R. Jimenez, Phys. Rev. D 71, 123001 (2005), astro-ph/0412269

    2005 arXiv

  144. [154]

    Borghi, M

    N. Borghi, M. Moresco, and A. Cimatti, Astrophys. J. Lett. 928, L4 (2022), 2110.04304

    2022 arXiv

  145. [155]

    Kaspi, W

    S. Kaspi, W. N. Brandt, D. Maoz, H. Netzer, D. P. Schneider, O. Shemmer, and C. J. Grier, Astrophys. J. 915, 129 (2021)

    2021

  146. [156]

    D. W. Pesce, J. A. Braatz, M. J. Reid, A. G. Riess, D. Scolnic, J. J. Condon, F. Gao, C. Henkel, C. M. V. Impellizzeri, C. Y. Kuo, et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 891, L1 (2020), 2001.09213

    2020 arXiv

  147. [157]

    M. J. Reid, D. W. Pesce, and A. G. Riess, Astrophys. J. Lett. 886, L27 (2019), 1908.05625

    2019 arXiv

  148. [158]

    Barua, V

    S. Barua, V. Ramakrishnan, and S. Desai, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2502.11998 (2025), 2502.11998

    2025 arXiv

  149. [159]

    B. M. Peterson, M. C. Bentz, L.-B. Desroches, A. V. Filippenko, L. C. Ho, S. Kaspi, A. Laor, D. Maoz, E. C. Moran, R. W. Pogge, et al., Astrophys. J. 632, 799 (2005), astro-ph/0506665

    2005 arXiv

  150. [160]

    B. M. Peterson, M. C. Bentz, L.-B. Desroches, A. V. Filippenko, L. C. Ho, S. Kaspi, A. Laor, D. Maoz, E. C. Moran, R. W. Pogge, et al., Astrophys. J. 641, 638 (2006)

    2006

  151. [161]

    K. G. Metzroth, C. A. Onken, and B. M. Peterson, Astrophys. J. 647, 901 (2006), astro-ph/0605038

    2006 arXiv

  152. [162]

    De Rosa, B

    G. De Rosa, B. Peterson, J. Ely, G. Kriss, D. Crenshaw, K. Horne, K. Korista, H. Netzer, R. Pogge, P. Ar´ evalo, et al., The Astrophysical Journal 806, 128 (2015)

    2015

  153. [163]

    P. Lira, S. Kaspi, H. Netzer, I. Botti, N. Morrell, J. Mej ´ ıa-Restrepo, P. S´ anchez-S´ aez, J. Mart ´ ınez-Palomera, and P. L´ opez, Astrophys. J. 865, 56 (2018), 1806.08358

    2018 arXiv

  154. [164]

    J. K. Hoormann, P. Martini, T. M. Davis, A. King, C. Lidman, D. Mudd, R. Sharp, N. E. Sommer, B. E. Tucker, Z. Yu, et al., MNRAS 487, 3650 (2019), 1902.04206

    2019 arXiv

  155. [165]

    C. J. Grier, Y. Shen, K. Horne, W. N. Brandt, J. R. Trump, P. B. Hall, K. Kinemuchi, D. Starkey, D. P. Schneider, L. C. Ho, et al., Astrophys. J. 887, 38 (2019), 1904.03199

    2019 arXiv

  156. [166]

    Y. Shen, C. J. Grier, K. Horne, W. N. Brandt, J. R. Trump, P. B. Hall, K. Kinemuchi, D. Starkey, D. P. Schneider, L. C. Ho, et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 883, L14 (2019), 1908.00027

    2019 arXiv

  157. [167]

    Aubourg, S

    ´E. Aubourg, S. Bailey, J. E. Bautista, F. Beutler, V. Bhardwaj, D. Bizyaev, M. Blanton, M. Blomqvist, A. S. Bolton, J. Bovy, et al., Phys. Rev. D 92, 123516 (2015), 1411.1074

    2015 arXiv

  158. [168]

    Seo and D

    H.-J. Seo and D. J. Eisenstein, Astrophys. J. 598, 720 (2003), astro-ph/0307460

    2003 arXiv

  159. [169]

    Bora and S

    K. Bora and S. Desai, JCAP 2021, 052 (2021), 2104.00974

    2021 arXiv

  160. [170]

    M. C. Bentz, K. D. Denney, C. J. Grier, A. J. Barth, B. M. Peterson, M. Vestergaard, V. N. Bennert, G. Canalizo, G. De Rosa, A. V. Filippenko, et al., Astrophys. J. 767, 149 (2013), 1303.1742

    2013 arXiv

  161. [171]

    Trotta, arXiv e-prints arXiv:1701.01467 (2017), 1701.01467

    R. Trotta, arXiv e-prints arXiv:1701.01467 (2017), 1701.01467

    2017 arXiv

  162. [172]

    Kerscher and J

    M. Kerscher and J. Weller, SciPost Physics Lecture Notes 9 (2019), 1901.07726

    2019 arXiv

  163. [173]

    Krishak and S

    A. Krishak and S. Desai, JCAP 2020, 006 (2020), 2003.10127

    2020 arXiv

  164. [174]

    J. U. Lange, MNRAS 525, 3181 (2023), 2306.16923

    2023 arXiv

  165. [175]

    Di Valentino, A

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, and J. Silk, Nature Astronomy 4, 196 (2020), 1911.02087

    2020 arXiv

  166. [176]

    Park and B

    C.-G. Park and B. Ratra, Astrophys. J. 882, 158 (2019), 1801.00213

    2019 arXiv

  167. [177]

    Giar` e, M

    W. Giar` e, M. Najafi, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, and J. T. Firouzjaee, JCAP 2024, 035 (2024), 2407.16689

    2024 arXiv

  168. [178]

    Nesseris, Y

    S. Nesseris, Y. Akrami, and G. D. Starkman, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2503.22529 (2025), 2503.22529

    2025 arXiv

  169. [179]

    C.-G. Park, J. de Cruz Perez, and B. Ratra, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2410.13627 (2024), 2410.13627

    2024 arXiv

  170. [180]

    Park and B

    C.-G. Park and B. Ratra, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2501.03480 (2025), 2501.03480

    2025 arXiv

  171. [181]

    Abdul-Karim, J

    DESI Collaboration, M. Abdul-Karim, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, L. Allen, C. Allende Prieto, O. Alves, A. Anand, U. Andrade, et al., arXiv e-prints arXiv:2503.14738 (2025), 2503.14738

    2025 arXiv

  172. [182]

    Shlivko, P

    D. Shlivko, P. J. Steinhardt, and C. L. Steinhardt, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2504.02028 (2025), 2504.02028

    2025 arXiv

  173. [183]

    Silva, M

    E. Silva, M. A. Sabogal, M. Scherer, R. C. Nunes, E. Di Valentino, and S. Kumar, Phys. Rev. D 111, 123511 (2025), 2503.23225

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.