Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 60 references

Kaluza-Klein inspired a model of the inflation with the inversed power law potential in Bianchi type-I universe

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Isotropic inflation wins over anisotropic initial conditions

desk verdict A careful but internally inconsistent paper: the action does not match the field equations, so the headline isotropization result belongs to a different vector-scalar theory. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.16139 v1 pith:PLLFS7TP submitted 2025-06-19 gr-qc

Jaturaporn Wattanakumpolkij , Patinya Ma-ardlerd , Natthason Autthisin , Pornpatara Chuvala , Nutthaphat Lunrasri , Chakrit Pongkitivanichkul , Daris Samart This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc MSC 83F0537N20 PACS 98.80.Cq04.50.Kd
keywords cosmicinflationanisotropiccosmologyBianchitype-IuniverseKaluza-Kleininspiredmodelinversepower-lawpotentialcentermanifoldtheoryisotropizationdynamicalsystemattractor
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

This paper asks whether an anisotropic early universe containing a gauge vector field and a scalar inflaton with an inverse power-law potential can be driven to isotropic accelerated expansion. The authors write the cosmological equations as a four-dimensional autonomous system and find that every critical point is non-hyperbolic, so eigenvalues alone cannot decide stability. They then apply center-manifold reduction and identify a single isotropic fixed point: shear, scalar kinetic energy, and vector energy all vanish while scalar potential energy dominates. The center-manifold dynamics make that point a stable attractor for positive $n$, meaning trajectories from anisotropic initial conditions converge to it. If this is right, the model supplies a dynamical isotropization mechanism consistent with the cosmic no-hair conjecture.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the compactified four-dimensional autonomous system in variables $S=\dot{\sigma}/\dot{\alpha}$, $X=\dot{\phi}/(\sqrt{6}M_p\dot{\alpha})$, $Y=\sqrt{V}/(\sqrt{3}M_p\dot{\alpha})$, and $Z=\lambda/(\lambda+1)$, with $\lambda=-M_pV'/V$ and $\alpha$ as time. For the inverse power-law potential $V=M^{n+4}\phi^{-n}$, all fixed points are non-hyperbolic, so the paper uses center-manifold theory: near point $E=(0,0,1,0)$ the stable coordinates are eliminated as functions $h(z)$ of the zero-eigenvalue direction $z$, and the reduced center flow is $z'=-z^3/n+O(z^4)$, whose lowest term is odd and negative for $n>0$. That sign is what converts a non-hyperbolic fixed point into a proven stable attractor.

What would settle it

Vary the action (1) directly for the vector field and compare the resulting conserved quantity with the relation $\dot A_x=f^{-2}e^{-\alpha-4\sigma}p_A$ used in Eqs. (3)-(6); if the coupling power differs, the autonomous system (19)-(22) belongs to a different theory, and the stability of point $E$ must be recomputed for the stated action.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In a model inspired by five-dimensional Kaluza-Klein reduction, with action $S=\int d^4x\sqrt{-g}[\frac{1}{2}M_p^2R-\frac{1}{2}(\partial\phi)^2-\frac{1}{4}f(\phi)F^2-V(\phi)]$, $f(\phi)=e^{-\sqrt{3}\phi/M_p}$, $V(\phi)=M^{n+4}\phi^{-n}$, in an anisotropic Bianchi type-I spacetime, the point $E=(S,X,Y,Z)=(0,0,1,0)$ is a stable attractor. At point $E$ the shear vanishes, the vector field contributes nothing, the scalar has no kinetic energy, and the potential term saturates the Friedmann constraint, so $w_{\rm eff}=-1$ and $q=-1$: accelerated, isotropic expansion. Because all fixed points of the autonomous system are non-hyperbolic, the paper establishes this stability not by linearization but by center-manifold reduction, which yields an effective flow $z'=-z^3/n+\cdots$ on the center direction and hence stability for $n>0$. The paper concludes that the model supports the cosmic no-hair conjecture: anisotropic phases are transient, and isotropic inflation is the generic late-time state.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the equations of motion (3)-(6), which contain $f^2(\phi)$ in the vector kinetic terms and the solution $\dot A_x\propto f^{-2}$, follow from the action (1) with coupling $f(\phi)$; if the action is the real starting point, the system analyzed is a different vector-scalar theory.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The universe can start with large shear and vector-field energy and still reach $w_{\rm eff}=-1$; isotropization is a dynamical outcome rather than a fine-tuned initial condition.
  • Any future stability analysis of this or similar vector-scalar models must treat non-hyperbolic points with center-manifold methods, since eigenvalue checks are inconclusive for all fixed points here.
  • The isotropic attractor exists for every value of $n>0$ in the inverse power-law potential, because only the sign of the leading cubic term matters.
  • Transient phases dominated by scalar kinetic energy or shear are not terminal states; they are saddles or centers that trajectories leave en route to inflation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same center-manifold machinery could be applied to exponential and power-law potentials; if the cubic term stays odd and negative, the isotropic attractor may be a general feature of dilatonic vector-scalar cosmologies.
  • Residual anisotropy at the end of inflation is set by how many e-folds trajectories spend near points A-D; this can be quantified by integrating the autonomous system and compared with CMB isotropy bounds.
  • Extending the analysis to other Bianchi types or non-Abelian vector fields would test whether isotropic inflation remains the generic attractor when more shear modes are present.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a Kaluza-Klein-inspired model of inflation in a Bianchi type-I universe, containing a scalar 'dilaton' with an inverse power-law potential and a vector field with an exponential coupling f(φ)=exp(-√3 φ/M_p). The authors derive field equations, construct a compact autonomous system in variables (S,X,Y,Z), and find that all fixed points are non-hyperbolic. They then apply center manifold theory to the potential-dominated isotropic point E=(0,0,1,0) and conclude that it is a stable attractor, so trajectories starting from anisotropic initial conditions isotropize and enter an accelerated phase. The central claim is that this establishes a dynamical isotropization mechanism for the KK-inspired model.

Significance. If the analysis were correct for the action as written, the paper would be a useful contribution: it gives an explicit center-manifold treatment of a non-hyperbolic isotropic fixed point in a Bianchi-I vector-scalar model and shows that the inverse power-law potential can support an isotropizing late-time attractor. The autonomous-system construction and the use of the compact variable Z=λ/(1+λ) are sensible, and the identification of the fixed points is mostly careful. However, the main result is currently tied to a theory that differs from the action stated in Eq. (1), and the center-manifold computation contains coefficient errors. These issues are fixable, but they must be corrected before the central claim can be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [Eq. (1) vs Eqs. (3)–(6)] The action (1) contains a vector kinetic term -1/4 f(φ)F^{μν}F_{μν}, but the field equations used in the paper are those of the different theory with -1/4 f(φ)^2 F^{μν}F_{μν}. Varying the stated action in the Bianchi-I background with A_μ=(0,A_x(t),0,0) gives the Maxwell equation ∂_t(e^{α+4σ} f dot A_x)=0, i.e. dot A_x ∝ f^{-1} e^{-α-4σ}, and the scalar-field source (1/2) f'(φ) e^{-2α+4σ} dot A_x^2. The manuscript instead uses dot A_x = f^{-2} e^{-α-4σ} p_A and a source f(φ)f'(φ)e^{-2α+4σ}dot A_x^2 in Eq. (6), which are precisely the equations obtained from a -1/4 f^2 F^2 action. This mismatch propagates into the density parameter Ω_A in Eq. (9) and into the autonomous system, e.g. the coefficient 3sqrt2 of Ω_A in Eq. (16). As a result, the fixed-point analysis and the stability of Point E are established for the f^2-coupled model, not for the model introduced in Eq. (1). The authors should either change Eq. (1) to -1/4 f^2 F^2, or rederive the field equations and the autonomous system for the f-coupling; if the latter is intended, the stability of Point E must be re-examined.
  2. [Sec. IV.E, Eqs. (49)–(50)] The center-manifold coefficients in Eq. (49) are not all correct. Expanding the shifted system (34)–(37) around the origin and imposing the quasilinear equation (47) to order z^2 gives a_2=1/3, b_2=(1/6)(-3sqrt2+sqrt6), c_2=-1/12. The values of b_2 and c_2 agree with Eq. (49), but the stated a_2=1/2 is wrong. In addition, the reduced equation (50) contains a z^4 term that does not follow from the stated substitution. Using the (correct or even the paper's own) b_2 and c_2 in the expression z'=(sqrt6/n)x(z-1)z^2 gives x=(z+z^2)/sqrt6+O(z^3) and hence z'=-z^3/n+O(z^5); the displayed z^4/n and -sqrt6 z^4/n terms are spurious. The leading term -z^3/n is unchanged, so the stability conclusion for Point E is not overturned, but the CMT computation as presented needs to be corrected.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical and grammatical issues, including 'inversed' in the title, 'Bainchi' in Sec. II, 'x-exist' for the x-axis, and missing spaces such as 'WhereM p' and 'as a time coordinatedα'. A careful proofread is needed.
  2. [Table III, Point A] The stability column reads 'Saddle for X^2≥1', but since X∈[-1,1] this only covers X=±1. The text in Sec. IV.A correctly states that Point A is a saddle for all X≠0; the table should say 'Saddle for X≠0'.
  3. [Sec. IV] The paper states that center manifold theory is required for all fixed points because all are non-hyperbolic, but CMT is applied only to Point E. For Points A–D the stability statements are based on the zero/non-zero eigenvalues alone; e.g., Point B with a completely zero Jacobian is called a 'center' without a center-manifold or other nonlinear analysis. This does not affect the main attractor claim but is a gap between the stated methodology and its implementation.
  4. [Fig. 1 and Fig. 2] The figures are described only in the text and are not included in the manuscript image; the caption for Fig. 1 says solid lines are isotropic initial conditions and dashed lines anisotropic, but the plotted coordinates (X,Y,Z) do not include S, so the reader cannot verify which trajectories are anisotropic. Adding an S-axis projection or stating the values of S used would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the attractor stability is derived from the stated autonomous system by center-manifold analysis, with no fitted parameters, renamed predictions, or load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that Point E (S=0, X=0, Y=1, Z=0) is a stable isotropic attractor. This is obtained by defining dimensionless variables in Eq. (7), forming the autonomous system in Eqs. (19)-(22), listing fixed points, and applying center manifold theory around Point E, which yields the reduced dynamics z' = -z^3/n + ... in Eq. (50). The stability conclusion is a direct mathematical consequence of those equations; no parameter is fitted to any observable, and no 'prediction' is a renamed fit. The self-citations ([33], [35], [36]) appear only in the introduction as background on KK-inspired Brans-Dicke and f(R,T) cosmology, not as support for the stability result, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work is invoked. The one notable internal issue is that field equations (3)-(6) contain f^2(φ) and f(φ)f'(φ) couplings, whereas varying the action (1) with -1/4 f(φ)F^2 would produce f(φ) couplings; consequently the autonomous system may describe a different vector-scalar theory than the action as written. That is an internal consistency and correctness concern, not a circularity: the analyzed attractor is still an independent mathematical consequence of the stated equations rather than an input redeclared as an output.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the model action and the inverse power-law potential chosen by hand. No parameters are fitted to data. The main free input is n. The phase-space boundaries at Z=0 and Z=1 are analyzed as fixed points even though they correspond to limits at infinite field values. The restriction to S>=0 is assumed without physical justification.

free parameters (1)
  • n = n=4 in numerical plots; analysis requires n>0
    Exponent in V=M^{n+4}phi^{-n}; sets the center manifold coefficient -1/n and the Gamma parameter. Chosen by hand, not fitted.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The 4D action (1) with kinetic term -1/4 f(phi)F^2 and f=e^{-sqrt(3)phi/M_p} arises from 5D Kaluza-Klein reduction, with the field content of gravity, a dilaton, and a U(1) gauge field.
    The paper motivates the model via KK theory but writes the action directly; the exponent sqrt(3) is stated as unique without derivation. Section II.
  • domain assumption The Bianchi type-I line element (2) has plane symmetry and the vector field is aligned along the x-direction, A_mu=(0,A_x(t),0,0).
    This ansatz restricts the phase space to the plane-symmetric case and excludes vector components in y and z. Section II.
  • ad hoc to paper The inflaton potential has the inverse power-law form V(phi)=M^{n+4}phi^{-n}, giving Gamma=(n+1)/n.
    The potential is inserted by hand; it does not emerge from KK reduction. The dynamical system and the center manifold coefficient depend on n. Section III.
  • ad hoc to paper The phase space is restricted to 0<=S<=1 (nonnegative shear) and lambda>=0 so that Z=lambda/(lambda+1) maps lambda in [0,infinity) to Z in [0,1).
    For inverse power-law potentials lambda=nM_p/phi>0, but S can be negative since S^2<=1; the restriction to S>=0 is not justified and may exclude vector-shear configurations. Sections III-IV.
  • domain assumption Fixed points at the boundary Z=0 (lambda=0) and Z=1 (lambda=infinity) are treated as part of the physical phase space.
    For the inverse power-law potential, lambda=0 is reached only as phi goes to infinity, and lambda=infinity as phi goes to 0; the stability analysis at these points is an asymptotic statement, not a statement about a finite-field de Sitter state. Section III.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Kaluza-Klein inspired a model of the inflation with the inversed power law potential in Bianchi type-I universe." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PLLFS7TP

@misc{pith2026250616139,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Kaluza-Klein inspired a model of the inflation with the inversed power law potential in Bianchi type-I universe},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PLLFS7TP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.16139}
}
read the original abstract

This work considers the dynamics of the gauge vector and inflaton (dilaton) fields inspired by Kaluza-Klein theory in an inflationary universe with Bianchi type-I spacetime. The inverse power-law potential of the inflaton field is used to study dynamical system analysis. As a result, all fixed points in the autonomous system are non-hyperbolic fixed points, and one cannot determine their stability. Therefore, a center manifold theory is required to analyze the stability of the dynamical system properly. Interestingly, we found an isotropic attractor point which means that the universe undergoes accelerated expansion (inflation) from an anisotropic phase to an isotropic phase of the universe. According to the dynamical system analysis of the anisotropic Bianchi type-I universe with the inspired Kaluza-Klein model, our results supported the isotropization of the observed universe.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.16139 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Phase space portrait of the system’s dynamics in the ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: The evolution of the density parameters along with the scale factor. Initially, the universe begins with a scalar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Clifton, P

    T. Clifton, P. G. Ferreira, A. Padilla, and C. Skordis, Phys. Rept.513, 1 (2012), 1106.2476

    arXiv 2012

  2. [2]

    Gron, Phys

    O. Gron, Phys. Rev. D32, 1586 (1985), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 34, 664 (1986)]

    work page 1985

  3. [3]

    W. C. Lim, H. van Elst, C. Uggla, and J. Wainwright, Phys. Rev. D69, 103507 (2004), gr-qc/0306118

    work page Pith review arXiv 2004

  4. [4]

    Pereira and C

    T. Pereira and C. Pitrou, Comptes Rendus Physique16, 1027 (2015), 1509.09166

    arXiv 2015

  5. [5]

    Nojiri, S

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, V. K. Oikonomou, and A. Constantini, Nucl. Phys. B985, 116011 (2022), 2210.16383

    arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    L. H. Ford, Phys. Rev. D40, 967 (1989), URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.40.967

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.40.967 1989

  7. [7]

    Golovnev, V

    A. Golovnev, V. Mukhanov, and V. Vanchurin, JCAP06, 009 (2008), 0802.2068

    arXiv 2008

  8. [8]

    Anisotropic Inflation from Vector Impurity

    S. Kanno, M. Kimura, J. Soda, and S. Yokoyama, JCAP08, 034 (2008), 0806.2422

    work page Pith review arXiv 2008

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Watanabe, S

    M.-a. Watanabe, S. Kanno, and J. Soda, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 191302 (2009), 0902.2833

    2009 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Kanno, J

    S. Kanno, J. Soda, and M.-a. Watanabe, JCAP12, 024 (2010), 1010.5307

    2010 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Soda, Class

    J. Soda, Class. Quant. Grav.29, 083001 (2012), 1201.6434

    2012 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Ito and J

    A. Ito and J. Soda, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 55 (2018), 1710.09701

    2018 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Chen and J

    C.-B. Chen and J. Soda, JCAP09, 026 (2021), 2106.04813

    2021 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Murata and J

    K. Murata and J. Soda, JCAP06, 037 (2011), 1103.6164

    2011 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Maleknejad and M

    A. Maleknejad and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Phys. Lett. B723, 224 (2013), 1102.1513

    2013 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Maleknejad, M

    A. Maleknejad, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and J. Soda, Phys. Rept.528, 161 (2013), 1212.2921

    2013 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Ito and J

    A. Ito and J. Soda, Phys. Rev. D92, 123533 (2015), 1506.02450

    2015 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Goodarzi, JCAP11, 052 (2022), 2208.10757

    P. Goodarzi, JCAP11, 052 (2022), 2208.10757

    2022 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Kanno, A

    S. Kanno, A. Mukuno, J. Soda, and K. Ueda, Phys. Rev. D107, 063524 (2023), 2209.05776

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    T. M. Pham, D. H. Nguyen, T. Q. Do, and W. F. Kao, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 105 (2024), 2309.02690

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Pitrou, T

    C. Pitrou, T. S. Pereira, and J.-P. Uzan, JCAP04, 004 (2008), 0801.3596

    2008 arXiv

  14. [22]

    J. Soda, J. Phys. Conf. Ser.600, 012026 (2015), 1410.8643

    2015 arXiv

  15. [23]

    T. Q. Do and W. F. Kao, Eur. Phys. J. C81, 525 (2021), 2104.14100

    2021 arXiv

  16. [24]

    T. Q. Do and W. F. Kao, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 123 (2022), 2110.13516

    2022 arXiv

  17. [25]

    T. Q. Do and W. F. Kao, Phys. Scripta99, 015002 (2024), 2304.08874

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    T. Q. Do, P. V. Dong, D. H. Nguyen, and J. K. Singh (2025), 2502.10462

    2025 arXiv

  19. [27]

    J. M. Overduin and P. S. Wesson, Phys. Rept.283, 303 (1997), gr-qc/9805018

    1997 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Bailin and A

    D. Bailin and A. Love, Rept. Prog. Phys.50, 1087 (1987)

    1987

  21. [29]

    P. G. O. Freund, Nucl. Phys. B209, 146 (1982)

    1982

  22. [30]

    Randjbar-Daemi, A

    S. Randjbar-Daemi, A. Salam, and J. A. Strathdee, Phys. Lett. B135, 388 (1984)

    1984

  23. [31]

    M. A. R. Osorio and M. A. Vazquez-Mozo, Mod. Phys. Lett. A8, 3111 (1993), hep-th/9305137

    1993 arXiv

  24. [32]

    P. K. Sahoo and B. Mishra, Can. J. Phys.92, 1062 (2014). 12

    2014

  25. [33]

    Pongkitivanichkul, D

    C. Pongkitivanichkul, D. Samart, N. Thongyoi, and N. Lunrasri, Phys. Dark Univ.30, 100731 (2020), 2005.08791

    2020 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Surendra Singh, K

    S. Surendra Singh, K. Manihar Singh, and L. Kumrah, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A36, 2150043 (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    Waeming, T

    A. Waeming, T. Klangburam, C. Pongkitivanichkul, and D. Samart, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 409 (2022), 2107.00678

    2022 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Jusufi, G

    K. Jusufi, G. G. Luciano, A. Sheykhi, and D. Samart, JHEAp47, 100373 (2025), 2411.14176

    2025 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Garc´ ıa-Salcedo, T

    R. Garc´ ıa-Salcedo, T. Gonzalez, F. A. Horta-Rangel, I. Quiros, and D. Sanchez-Guzm´ an, Eur. J. Phys.36, 025008 (2015), 1501.04851

    2015 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Tamanini, Phys

    N. Tamanini, Phys. Rev. D89, 083521 (2014), 1401.6339

    2014 arXiv

  31. [39]

    A. Alho, J. Hell, and C. Uggla, Class. Quant. Grav.32, 145005 (2015), 1503.06994

    2015 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Bouhmadi-L´ opez, J

    M. Bouhmadi-L´ opez, J. a. Marto, J. a. Morais, and C. M. Silva, JCAP03, 042 (2017), 1611.03100

    2017 arXiv

  33. [41]

    C. G. Boehmer and N. Chan,Dynamical systems in cosmology.(2017), 1409.5585

    2017 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Bahamonde, C

    S. Bahamonde, C. G. B¨ ohmer, S. Carloni, E. J. Copeland, W. Fang, and N. Tamanini, Phys. Rept.775-777, 1 (2018), 1712.03107

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Pal, Ph.D

    S. Pal, Ph.D. thesis, Jadavpur University, Department of Mathematics, India (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    A. Alho, W. C. Lim, and C. Uggla, Class. Quant. Grav.39, 145010 (2022), 2201.07596

    2022 arXiv

  37. [45]

    C. A. Clarkson, A. A. Coley, and S. D. Quinlan, Phys. Rev. D64, 122003 (2001), astro-ph/0108268

    2001 arXiv

  38. [46]

    E. J. Copeland, A. R. Liddle, and D. Wands, Phys. Rev. D57, 4686 (1998), gr-qc/9711068

    1998 arXiv

  39. [47]

    I. P. C. Heard and D. Wands, Class. Quant. Grav.19, 5435 (2002), gr-qc/0206085

    2002 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Z. K. Guo, Y.-S. Piao, and Y.-Z. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B568, 1 (2003), hep-th/0304048

    2003 arXiv

  41. [49]

    S. Das, M. Banerjee, and N. Roy, JCAP08, 024 (2019), 1903.02288

    2019 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Chaubey and R

    R. Chaubey and R. Raushan, Astrophys. Space Sci.361, 215 (2016)

    2016

  43. [51]

    Karˇ ciauskas, Mod

    M. Karˇ ciauskas, Mod. Phys. Lett. A31, 1640002 (2016), 1604.00269

    2016 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Ghaffarnejad and E

    H. Ghaffarnejad and E. Yaraie, Gen. Rel. Grav.49, 49 (2017), 1604.06269

    2017 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Guarnizo, J

    A. Guarnizo, J. B. Orjuela-Quintana, and C. A. Valenzuela-Toledo, Phys. Rev. D102, 083507 (2020), 2007.12964

    2020 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Bhanja, G

    S. Bhanja, G. Mandal, A. A. Mamon, and S. K. Biswas, JCAP10, 050 (2023), 2307.13000

    2023 arXiv

  47. [55]

    T. Q. Do, D. H. Nguyen, and T. M. Pham, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D32, 2350087 (2023), 2303.17283

    2023 arXiv

  48. [56]

    A. D. Rendall, Gen. Rel. Grav.34, 1277 (2002), gr-qc/0112040

    2002 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Alho and C

    A. Alho and C. Uggla, J. Math. Phys.56, 012502 (2015), 1406.0438

    2015 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Hrycyna and M

    O. Hrycyna and M. Szyd lowski, JCAP11, 013 (2015), 1506.03429

    2015 arXiv

  51. [59]

    C. G. Boehmer, N. Chan, and R. Lazkoz, Phys. Lett. B714, 11 (2012), 1111.6247

    2012 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Pal and S

    S. Pal and S. Chakraborty, Gen. Rel. Grav.51, 124 (2019), 2103.02715

    2019 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.