Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 29 cited by

Dark Energy Is Not That Into You: Variable Couplings after DESI DR2 BAO

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A time-varying dark-energy–dark-matter coupling is preferred over no coupling at more than 95% confidence in one of four interacting models, with energy flowing from dark energy into dark matter.

desk verdict Competent DESI DR2 update on variable dark-sector couplings; the headline IVS1a detection is internally consistent but rests on an unverified perturbation stability treatment and is oversold relative to the paper's own Bayes factors. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.19109 v1 pith:25S5DE5B submitted 2025-08-26 astro-ph.CO gr-qc

Weiqiang Yang , Sibo Zhang , Olga Mena , Supriya Pan , Eleonora Di Valentino This is my paper
classification astro-ph.COgr-qc
keywords interactingdarkenergymattercouplingtime-dependentDESIDR2BAOcosmologicaltensionsBayesianevidenceMCMCparameterestimation
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

Most interacting dark-sector models treat the coupling between dark energy and dark matter as a constant. This paper relaxes that assumption: it lets the coupling vary with the scale factor in two functional forms and constrains the resulting models with Planck CMB data, DESI DR2 baryon-acoustic-oscillation measurements, and three independent supernova samples. The central result is that one of the four scenarios—an interaction proportional to the dark-energy density with a coupling that changes linearly with (1−a)—shows evidence for a nonzero present-day coupling at more than 95% confidence when CMB+DESI is combined with any of the three supernova catalogs. The preferred sign means energy flows from dark energy into dark matter, raising the inferred matter density and lowering the clustering parameter S8 relative to the standard model; the other three scenarios give at most mild or inconclusive evidence, and ΛCDM remains preferred by Bayesian evidence in all cases.

What carries the argument

The central object is a time-dependent dark-sector coupling ξ(a) inserted into two interaction rates: Q=3ξ(a)Hρ_x, proportional to the dark-energy density, and Q=3ξ(a)Hρ_cρ_x/(ρ_c+ρ_x), proportional to the product of the two dark densities divided by their sum. Two parametrizations are used: a two-parameter Taylor form ξ(a)=ξ0+ξa(1−a), and a one-parameter, divergence-free form ξ(a)=ξ0[1+(1−a)/(a^2+(1−a)^2)] adapted from a dark-energy equation-of-state parametrization. These functions change the energy flow between the dark sectors at both background and perturbation level, altering the CMB temperature spectrum (acoustic peak heights and the low-multipole integrated Sachs-Wolfe region) and th

What would settle it

Run the cited interacting-fluid stability check for IVS1a at the best-fit values ξ0≈-0.15 and ξa≈0.34: if the criterion flags a negative effective sound speed squared in that region, the posterior is sampling an unstable fluid and the >95% evidence is not physical. A dataset-level falsifier is to repeat the CMB+DESI+supernova fit with an independent high-resolution CMB likelihood; if the negative-ξ0 posterior disappears, the signal is tied to the Planck likelihood.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that, after the DESI DR2 BAO data are added to Planck CMB and Type Ia supernova samples, the interacting model IVS1a—defined by Q=3ξ(a)Hρ_x with ξ(a)=ξ0+ξa(1−a)—produces a present-day coupling ξ0 that is negative at more than 95% confidence (for example ξ0=-0.146 with 68% uncertainties +0.045/-0.074 for CMB+DESI+PantheonPlus), while the time-variation parameter ξa is nonzero at more than 68% confidence and at more than 95% for the DESY5 sample. In the authors' reading, this points to genuine energy exchange between dark energy and dark matter, with a coupling that changes with cosmic time, and the sign of the effect is robust across the three supernova compilatio

Load-bearing premise

The result depends on the assumption that the model's equations stay stable at the negative couplings the data prefer; if that assumption fails, the detected signal is an artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the IVS1a result holds, dark energy and dark matter are not separately conserved: energy flows from dark energy into dark matter today, at a rate set by ξ0 about -0.15.
  • The same data combination raises the inferred matter density (Ωm≈0.35) and lowers the clustering amplitude (S8≈0.76), easing the S8 tension relative to Planck-ΛCDM while keeping H0 near 68 km/s/Mpc.
  • The sign of the coupling flips from positive in CMB-only fits to negative in CMB+DESI fits, indicating that the DESI BAO measurements are driving the >95% evidence.
  • The result is parametrization-dependent: only the two-parameter linear-in-(1−a) coupling reaches >95% confidence; the one-parameter divergence-free form does not cross that threshold.
  • In none of the five data combinations does the Bayesian evidence prefer an interacting model over ΛCDM, so the paper's claim is a preference inside a restricted model family, not a decisive detection.

Reading between the lines

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

  • My inference: the same negative-coupling preference should be tested in models where the dark-energy equation of state is also time-dependent, since the DESI DR2 BAO data independently favour dynamical dark energy; the two effects could reinforce or cancel.
  • My inference: the Bayesian penalty from two extra parameters is the main reason ΛCDM stays preferred; a theoretically motivated one-parameter coupling that reproduces IVS1a's late-time behaviour would be a sharper test of the interaction.
  • My inference: because the >95% result emerges when any of the three supernova compilations is added, a single re-analysis with one unified supernova likelihood plus low-redshift growth data would either consolidate or challenge the signal.
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. The paper constrains four interacting dark-energy (DE) / dark-matter (DM) models with time-dependent coupling ξ(a) using Planck 2018 CMB, DESI DR2 BAO, and three Type Ia supernova compilations (PantheonPlus, Union3, DESY5). The models combine two interaction functions, Q = 3ξ(a)Hρ_x (IVS1) and Q = 3ξ(a)H ρ_cρ_x/(ρ_c+ρ_x) (IVS2), with two coupling parametrizations, ξ(a)=ξ0+ξa(1−a) (IVS1a/IVS2a) and ξ(a)=ξ0[1+(1−a)/(a^2+(1−a)^2)] (IVS1b/IVS2b). The central result is that for IVS1a the combination CMB+DESI plus any of the three SN samples excludes ξ0=0 at more than 95% confidence (e.g., ξ0 = −0.146, 95% interval [−0.256, −0.016] for CMB+DESI+PantheonPlus), while the other cases show at most mild evidence. The paper also reports that Bayesian model comparison always favors ΛCDM over the interacting models, with log Bayes factors lnB_ij typically between −4 and −12.

Significance. If the perturbation treatment is valid, the IVS1a result is a nontrivial constraint on an interesting class of varying-coupling interacting dark sector models, and the paper usefully documents the dataset and model dependence of such constraints. The analysis uses modern external datasets and a nested null model, and it reports both parameter constraints and Bayesian evidences. However, the headline claim is currently overstated: the 95% credible interval excludes zero within a model that is itself strongly disfavored relative to ΛCDM by the paper's own evidence calculation. In addition, the paper does not demonstrate that the perturbed-fluid implementation is stable in the negative-ξ0 region that drives the IVS1a claim. Both issues need to be addressed before the result can be taken as evidence for a nonzero dark-sector interaction.

major comments (3)
  1. [II (Eqs. (6)–(7)), III (methodology), Table II] The central >95% claim depends on the perturbed-fluid implementation in the modified CAMB, but the manuscript never states the perturbed conservation equations for DE when Q=3ξ(a)Hρ_x and w_x=−1, nor does it apply a stability criterion. For negative ξ0, which is the preferred IVS1a region (e.g., ξ0=−0.146 for CMB+DESI+PantheonPlus in Table II), the DE perturbation sector can develop instabilities of the type discussed in Valiviita et al. [11]. If the code instead treats DE as a homogeneous vacuum (δρ_x=θ_x=0), the model is different and the concern disappears. The text cites [11] but does not state which treatment is used, and the modified code is not released. Please report the perturbed conservation equations, provide stability conditions for Eqs. (6)–(7) with ξ(a) from Eqs. (9) and (11), and verify that the posterior samples lie in the stable region, or compare with the vacuum-interac
  2. [Abstract; Section IV.A; Table II (lnBij row)] The abstract and conclusions describe the IVS1a result as 'evidence for a non-zero interaction at more than 95% CL'. However, Table II reports lnBij=−5.8 for CMB+DESI+PantheonPlus (and −5.5 and −4.0 for the other SN combinations), which is strong evidence against IVS1a relative to ΛCDM on the revised Jeffreys scale stated in Section III. A 95% credible interval that excludes ξ0=0 inside a strongly disfavored model is not evidence for an interaction over ΛCDM; it is a parameter constraint within that model. Please rephrase the abstract and conclusions to separate these two statements, e.g., 'within IVS1a the data exclude ξ0=0 at >95% CL, but the model as a whole is disfavored relative to ΛCDM'.
  3. [Section II, Eqs. (9) and (11); Section V] The conclusion that the coupling is 'dynamical' is partly built into the parametrizations and is not an independent prediction of the data. For IVS1a, ξ(a)=ξ0+ξa(1−a) has a time-dependent term by construction, so finding ξa≠0 is a fit of the assumed functional form rather than a discovery of time variation. The paper should be explicit that it is testing the viability of specific parametrizations, not reconstructing the time dependence of ξ in a model-independent way. This does not invalidate the parameter constraints, but it should frame the robustness claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table II] In the CMB+DESI+Union3 column, the reported Ω_bh^2 value is '0.00246+0.00014...' which appears to be a typo for 0.02246. Please correct.
  2. [Figure 7 caption] The caption notes that the dotted zero line is 'not clearly visible' in the right panel. Please use a different line style or add a small legend so the reader can identify the no-interaction case.
  3. [Section III] The modified CAMB code is not released. Releasing the code or providing a public repository would substantially improve reproducibility, especially since the perturbation treatment is a key part of the central claim.
  4. [Section II] Equation (5) uses κ^2 without explicitly defining it as 8πG. Defining it would make the paper more self-contained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: IVS1a detection is a conditional fit to external data; self-cited parametrizations are transparent ansätze, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that IVS1a gives ξ0<0 at >95% CL with CMB+DESI plus any of the three SNIa samples—is a Bayesian parameter constraint obtained by MCMC against external datasets (Planck 2018 CMB, DESI DR2 BAO, PantheonPlus/Union3/DESY5). These datasets are independent of the paper's model parameters and of the authors' prior work. The interaction functions Q=3ξ(a)Hρx and Q=3ξ(a)Hρcρx/(ρc+ρx), with ξ(a) from Eqs. (9) and (11), are adopted as explicit ansätze; the paper states 'The choice of ξ(a) is not unique' and concludes that the 'observational outcome strongly depends on both the form of the interaction function and the parametrization chosen for ξ(a).' Thus the >95% exclusion is a data-driven constraint conditional on that parametrization, not a quantity derived from the parametrization itself. The null model ξ=0 is nested, so the nested-model comparison is meaningful and the evidence values (lnBij<0) are reported honestly. Reference [122], a prior paper by several of the same authors, supplies Eq. (9) and the IVS1/IVS2 labels, but this self-citation is not load-bearing: no uniqueness theorem is invoked, no alternative is forbidden, and the paper explicitly concedes that the choice of ξ(a) is not unique. Eq. (11) is proposed in this paper with motivation from the independent Barboza–Alcaniz parametrization [123]. The reviewer's stability concern about the perturbed-fluid implementation for negative ξ0 is a correctness/validation risk rather than circularity: if the modified CAMB implementation were internally inconsistent, the result would be invalid, but it would not reduce to the paper's inputs by construction. No derived quantity is equal to a fitted input, and no external result is imported solely from self-citations. Accordingly, no significant circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on three phenomenological inputs: the interaction forms (Eqs. 6-7), the xi(a) parametrizations (Eqs. 9 and 11) taken from the authors' earlier work, and the assumed stability of the perturbation implementation. xi_0 and xi_a are the fitted parameters doing the work; the time-dependence is built into the ansatz rather than derived.

free parameters (2)
  • xi_0 (IVS1a) = -0.146 (68% CL [-0.220,-0.101], CMB+DESI+PantheonPlus); 0.19 (CMB only)
    Present-day coupling strength; the central >95% claim is the posterior of this fitted parameter.
  • xi_a (IVS1a) = 0.34 (68% CL [0.18,0.52], CMB+DESI+PantheonPlus)
    Slope of the coupling evolution in Eq. (9); fitted, not derived.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Spatially flat FLRW geometry with GR as the gravitational theory (Eq. 1).
    Background geometry assumed throughout the analysis.
  • domain assumption Dark sector energy exchange is described by Q=3xi(a)H*rho_x or Q=3xi(a)H*rho_c*rho_x/(rho_c+rho_x) (Eqs. 6-7).
    Phenomenological interaction forms; no fundamental theory is given or derived.
  • ad hoc to paper Time-dependent coupling follows either the Taylor-truncated form xi_0+xi_a(1-a) or the Barboza-Alcaniz-inspired one-parameter form (Eqs. 9 and 11).
    These functional forms were introduced by the same authors in ref [122]; the shapes are chosen, not derived from a theory.
  • domain assumption Perturbation equations for the interaction models, as coded in the modified CAMB, are stable over the sampled parameter space.
    No stability check is reported; interacting dark energy models are known to have unstable regions (Valiviita et al. [11] is cited but not applied).
invented entities (1)
  • Time-dependent coupling xi(a)
    purpose: Allows the strength of DM-DE energy exchange to vary with the scale factor.
    A phenomenological freedom inserted into the interaction; its posterior is fitted to data and no independent observable is predicted outside the fitted sample.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dark Energy Is Not That Into You: Variable Couplings after DESI DR2 BAO." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/25S5DE5B

@misc{pith2026250819109,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dark Energy Is Not That Into You: Variable Couplings after DESI DR2 BAO},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/25S5DE5B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.19109}
}
abstract

In interacting dark energy (DE) and dark matter (DM) scenarios, the interaction function typically includes a coupling parameter $\xi$ that quantifies the strength of energy exchange between the dark sectors. While $\xi$ is often assumed to be constant, there is no fundamental reason to exclude a time-dependent coupling, which could provide a more general and realistic description of dark sector dynamics. In this work, we study two widely used interacting models involving pressureless DM and DE, where the coupling parameter is allowed to vary with the scale factor $a$. Specifically, we consider two parametrizations: $\xi(a) = \xi_0 + \xi_a (1-a)$ and $\xi(a) = \xi_0 \left(1 + \frac{1-a}{a^2 + (1-a)^2} \right)$, and constrain them using the latest cosmological observations, including Planck 2018 CMB data, DESI DR2 BAO measurements, and multiple Type Ia supernovae samples. Our results show that one scenario yields evidence for a non-zero interaction at more than 95\% confidence level, while the remaining cases indicate at most mild or inconclusive signs of interaction. These findings highlight the potential of variable coupling models and the importance of continued investigation into the nature of the dark sectors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.19109 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. In the upper panel, we show the CMB TT spectra for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. We show the CMB TT spectra (left plot) and the matter power spectra (right plot) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. In the upper panel, we show the CMB TT spectra for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. We show the CMB TT spectra (left plot) and the matter power spectra (right plot) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. One-dimensional posterior distributions and two-dimensional joint contours for the most relevant parameters of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. One-dimensional posterior distributions and two-dimensional joint contours for the most relevant parameters of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. One-dimensional posterior distributions and two-dimensional joint contours for the most relevant parameters of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. One-dimensional posterior distributions and two-dimensional joint contours for the most relevant parameters of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: , which shows the time evolution of the cou￾pling parameter ξ(z) for both functional forms defined in Eqs. (9) and (11). Each plot also includes the 68% CL region, derived from the full set of datasets considered in this analysis. From the left panel, corresponding to…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 29 Pith papers

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

  1. Non-linear Structure Formation in Planck+DESI Favoured Interacting Dark Energy Cosmologies

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    N-body simulations of IDE with Q=ξHρ_x show scale-dependent deviations in the matter power spectrum, density morphology, and halo abundance that standard ΛCDM-calibrated prescriptions cannot reproduce.

  2. Saturation Mechanisms in the Interacting Dark Sector

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Nonlinear dark-sector interaction models with a half-saturation sparseness scale are observationally preferred over their linear counterparts at >95% confidence for two of three cases.

  3. Non-minimally coupled quintessence with sign-switching interaction

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new quintessence model with non-minimal coupling produces an effective sign-switching interaction that fits current data better than LambdaCDM or w0waCDM and accounts for late-time dark energy weakening without phan...

  4. Evidence for deviation in gravitational light deflection from general relativity at cosmological scales with KiDS-Legacy and CMB lensing

    astro-ph.CO 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    KiDS-Legacy weak lensing plus CMB data yields a 3 sigma deviation in light deflection from GR in a Lambda CDM background, with the signal driven by large-scale CMB lensing amplitudes.

  5. Nonlinear Matter Power Spectrum from relativistic $N$-body Simulations: $\Lambda_{\rm s}$CDM versus $\Lambda$CDM

    astro-ph.CO 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Relativistic N-body simulations of Lambda_s CDM produce a redshift-dependent crest in the matter power spectrum ratio, peaking at 20-25% near the transition and leaving a 15-20% uplift at z=0 on group scales.

  6. Background-level reconstruction of scalar-field potentials from dark-energy histories and comparison with analytic potential families

    astro-ph.CO 2026-03 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    A background reconstruction maps prescribed ρ_de(z) histories to V(φ) and ranks analytic potentials by Bayesian evidence, with exponential preferred for CPL and shifted-tanh for sign-switching targets.

  7. Metastability in Emergent Dark Energy: A New Framework Confronting Cosmological Observations

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    MEDE sets w(z)=-1-Δ tanh[log10((1+z)/(1+zt))] with fitted zt≈0.425 and Δ≈0.87, yielding ΔDIC=-9.29 versus ΛCDM on Planck+DESI+PantheonPlus while matching CPL performance.

  8. Signatures of Modified Gravity on Linear Scales in a Dynamical Dark Energy Background

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Modified gravity below O(10) Mpc in a CPL dynamical dark energy background is required to suppress structure growth at low redshifts while satisfying CMB constraints from ISW and lensing.

  9. Signatures of Modified Gravity on Linear Scales in a Dynamical Dark Energy Background

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Using Planck, DESI, supernovae, and redshift-space distortions, the authors infer that modified gravity, if present, must act only below ~30 Mpc and cannot modify the large scales previously considered.

  10. Coupled quintessence with a potential from supergravity exhibits sign-changing interaction

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Coupled SUGRA quintessence is preferred by current data at >4σ over the uncoupled case, with sign-changing interaction producing phantom-crossing behavior statistically similar to the CPL parametrization.

  11. Effective field theory interpretation of ATLAS measurements involving the Higgs boson, electroweak bosons and the top quark

    hep-ex 2026-04 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

    A simultaneous fit to multiple ATLAS datasets constrains 48 SMEFT Wilson coefficients and matches subsets to 2HDM and heavy-vector models, finding consistency with the Standard Model.

  12. Probing Dynamical Dark Energy with Late-Time Data: Evidence, Tensions, and the Limits of the $w_0w_a$CDM Framework

    astro-ph.CO 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Evidence for dynamical dark energy in the w0waCDM framework is strongly dataset-dependent, driven by mismatches in low-redshift BAO distance ratios that produce divergent expansion histories and inconsistent Hubble te...

  13. Revisiting the Matter Creation Process: Observational Constraints on Gravitationally Induced Dark Energy and the Hubble Tension

    astro-ph.CO 2026-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Gravitationally induced particle creation models fit cosmological data as well as ΛCDM and reduce the Hubble tension from 4.3σ to 2.4–3σ.

  14. Robust Preference for Dark Sector Interactions

    astro-ph.CO 2026-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Interacting dark matter–dark energy models fit DESI BAO and CMB data as well as evolving-dark-energy (CPL) models, with a coupling preference that persists under DES-Dovekie supernova recalibration.

  15. Neutrino mass constraints in the Schwarzschild-de Sitter black-hole dark energy model with ACT DR6 and DESI DR2 data

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.5 of 10

    SdSDE dark energy yields a ~0.16–0.21 eV positive neutrino-mass preference with DESI+ACT data, but χ² strongly favors extended ΛCDM and the shift is likely compensation.

  16. Cosmological Viability of Exponential Infrared $f(T)$ Gravity

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Exponential IR f(T) gravity Model I alleviates Hubble tension but is disfavoured by combined Planck/ACT/SPT+DESI+Pantheon+ data; Model II is ruled out because background constraints force unphysical shifts in CMB parameters.

  17. Generalizing the interacting dilatonic ghost condensate as a dark energy model

    gr-qc 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Generalizes the interacting dilatonic ghost condensate dark energy model, performs phase-space analysis for non-interacting and two interacting cases, and reports parameter constraints from Cosmic Chronometers, Panthe...

  18. Unifying the Dark Sector with the New Generalized Chaplygin Gas: Observational Constraints

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    A generalized Chaplygin gas with redshift-dependent exponent unifies the dark sector but is statistically equivalent to ΛCDM after penalizing for extra parameters in Bayesian fits to late-time data.

  19. Neutrino mass constraints in interacting dark energy models after DESI DR2

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Upper bounds on total neutrino mass in four phenomenological interacting dark energy models are derived from DESI DR2 BAO plus CMB and SNIa data, showing strong dependence on the interaction term form and statistical ...

  20. Effective field theory interpretation of ATLAS measurements involving the Higgs boson, electroweak bosons and the top quark

    hep-ex 2026-04 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Three nonlinear interacting dark energy models with a saturation ('sparseness') scale are constrained against late-time cosmological data, showing mild preference for nonzero sparseness but no decisive improvement over ΛCDM.

  21. Constraints on Coupled Dark Energy in the DESI Era

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    New cosmological data mildly favor a small coupling between dark matter and a scalar dark energy field at |β| ≈ 0.03 while allowing an effective phantom-crossing equation of state.

  22. Redshift evolution of the Hubble constant: Constraints and new insights from an interacting dark energy model

    astro-ph.CO 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Modified IDE model with interaction parameter alpha ~0.01 from late-universe data shows H0 decreasing with redshift, tightening to 10^-5 when CMB priors are added.

  23. 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.

  24. Dark Energy in the DESI Era: A Brief Review of Evidence, Beyond-$\Lambda$CDM Interpretations, and Tensions

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    DESI data hint that dark energy evolves (w0>−1, wa<0, phantom crossing) at 2.5–4.2σ, but the same expansion history can also be produced by interacting dark sectors, modified gravity, or non-cold dark matter.

  25. Breaking Free from the Swampland of Impossible Universes through the DESI Portal

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    DESI data favoring time-evolving dark energy may place constant-Λ cosmology in the string swampland and favor string-inspired dynamical dark energy.

  26. Breaking Free from the Swampland of Impossible Universes through the DESI Portal

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    A review of string-inspired dynamical dark energy models claiming compatibility with DESI's hints of evolving dark energy under swampland constraints.

  27. Breaking Free from the Swampland of Impossible Universes through the DESI Portal

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    A review summarizing advancements over the past two years that link DESI baryon acoustic oscillation data to string-inspired scenarios with dynamic dark energy.

  28. Breaking Free from the Swampland of Impossible Universes through the DESI Portal

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    DESI data indicating evolving dark energy may allow string theory to describe observed universes without violating swampland constraints on constant dark energy.

  29. Dark Energy in the DESI Era: A Brief Review of Evidence, Beyond-$\Lambda$CDM Interpretations, and Tensions

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 1.0 of 10

    Review of DESI evidence for dynamical dark energy, its dependence on parametrization and datasets, and alternative beyond-LambdaCDM interpretations that may address cosmological tensions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

135 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 23 Pith papers

  1. [11]

    Valiviita, E

    J. Valiviita, E. Majerotto, and R. Maartens, Instability in interacting dark energy and dark matter fluids, JCAP 07, 020, arXiv:0804.0232 [astro-ph]

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    Amendola, Coupled quintessence, Phys

    L. Amendola, Coupled quintessence, Phys. Rev. D 62, 043511 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9908023

    arXiv 2000

  3. [2]

    Amendola and C

    L. Amendola and C. Quercellini, Tracking and coupled dark energy as seen by WMAP, Phys. Rev. D68, 023514 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0303228

    arXiv 2003

  4. [3]

    Cai and A

    R.-G. Cai and A. Wang, Cosmology with interaction between phantom dark energy and dark matter and the coincidence problem, JCAP 03, 002, arXiv:hep- th/0411025

    arXiv

  5. [4]

    Huey and B

    G. Huey and B. D. Wandelt, Interacting quintessence. The Coincidence problem and cosmic acceleration, Phys. Rev. D 74, 023519 (2006), arXiv:astro- ph/0407196

    arXiv 2006

  6. [5]

    Gumjudpai, T

    B. Gumjudpai, T. Naskar, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa, Coupled dark energy: Towards a general description of the dynamics, JCAP 06, 007, arXiv:hep-th/0502191

    arXiv

  7. [6]

    A. W. Brookfield, C. van de Bruck, D. F. Mota, and D. Tocchini-Valentini, Cosmology with massive neutri- nos coupled to dark energy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 061301 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0503349

    arXiv 2006

  8. [7]

    M. S. Berger and H. Shojaei, Interacting dark energy and the cosmic coincidence problem, Phys. Rev. D 73, 083528 (2006), arXiv:gr-qc/0601086

    arXiv 2006

Show all 135 references
  1. [8]

    del Campo, R

    S. del Campo, R. Herrera, G. Olivares, and D. Pavon, Interacting models of soft coincidence, Phys. Rev. D 74, 023501 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0606520

    2006 arXiv

  2. [9]

    J. D. Barrow and T. Clifton, Cosmologies with energy exchange, Phys. Rev. D 73, 103520 (2006), arXiv:gr- qc/0604063

    2006

  3. [10]

    del Campo, R

    S. del Campo, R. Herrera, and D. Pavon, Toward a so- lution of the coincidence problem, Phys. Rev. D 78, 021302 (2008), arXiv:0806.2116 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Chongchitnan, Cosmological Perturbations in Mod- els of Coupled Dark Energy, Phys

    S. Chongchitnan, Cosmological Perturbations in Mod- els of Coupled Dark Energy, Phys. Rev. D 79, 043522 (2009), arXiv:0810.5411 [astro-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  5. [13]

    M. B. Gavela, D. Hernandez, L. Lopez Honorez, O. Mena, and S. Rigolin, Dark coupling, JCAP 07, 034, [Erratum: JCAP 05, E01 (2010)], arXiv:0901.1611 13 [astro-ph.CO]

    2010 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Xia, Constraint on coupled dark energy models from observations, Phys

    J.-Q. Xia, Constraint on coupled dark energy models from observations, Phys. Rev. D 80, 103514 (2009), arXiv:0911.4820 [astro-ph.CO]

    2009 arXiv

  7. [15]

    M. B. Gavela, L. Lopez Honorez, O. Mena, and S. Rigolin, Dark Coupling and Gauge Invariance, JCAP 11, 044, arXiv:1005.0295 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  8. [16]

    Mena, Low redshift probes and coupled dark matter- dark energy models, J

    O. Mena, Low redshift probes and coupled dark matter- dark energy models, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 259, 012084 (2010)

    2010

  9. [17]

    Baldi and V

    M. Baldi and V. Pettorino, High-z massive clusters as a test for dynamical coupled dark energy, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 412, L1 (2011), arXiv:1006.3761 [astro- ph.CO]

    2011 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Lopez Honorez, B

    L. Lopez Honorez, B. A. Reid, O. Mena, L. Verde, and R. Jimenez, Coupled dark matter-dark energy in light of near Universe observations, JCAP 09, 029, arXiv:1006.0877 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  11. [19]

    Lee and M

    J. Lee and M. Baldi, Can Coupled Dark Energy Speed Up the Bullet Cluster?, Astrophys. J. 747, 45 (2012), arXiv:1110.0015 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Beynon, M

    E. Beynon, M. Baldi, D. J. Bacon, K. Koyama, and C. Sabiu, Weak lensing predictions for coupled dark en- ergy cosmologies at non-linear scales, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 422, 3546 (2012), arXiv:1111.6974 [astro- ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Amendola, V

    L. Amendola, V. Pettorino, C. Quercellini, and A. Vollmer, Testing coupled dark energy with next- generation large-scale observations, Phys. Rev. D 85, 103008 (2012), arXiv:1111.1404 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Farajollahi, A

    H. Farajollahi, A. Ravanpak, and G. F. Fadakar, Inter- acting agegraphic dark energy model in tachyon cosmol- ogy coupled to matter, Phys. Lett. B 711, 225 (2012), arXiv:1206.5796 [physics.gen-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Pettorino, L

    V. Pettorino, L. Amendola, C. Baccigalupi, and C. Quercellini, Constraints on coupled dark energy us- ing CMB data from WMAP and SPT, Phys. Rev. D 86, 103507 (2012), arXiv:1207.3293 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  16. [24]

    L. P. Chimento and M. G. Richarte, Dark mat- ter, dark energy, and dark radiation coupled with a transversal interaction, Phys. Rev. D86, 103501 (2012), arXiv:1210.5505 [gr-qc]

    2012 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Salvatelli, A

    V. Salvatelli, A. Marchini, L. Lopez-Honorez, and O. Mena, New constraints on Coupled Dark Energy from the Planck satellite experiment, Phys. Rev. D 88, 023531 (2013), arXiv:1304.7119 [astro-ph.CO]

    2013 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Pettorino, Testing modified gravity with Planck: the case of coupled dark energy, Phys

    V. Pettorino, Testing modified gravity with Planck: the case of coupled dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 88, 063519 (2013), arXiv:1305.7457 [astro-ph.CO]

    2013 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Xia, New Limits on Coupled Dark Energy from Planck, JCAP 11, 022, arXiv:1311.2131 [astro-ph.CO]

    J.-Q. Xia, New Limits on Coupled Dark Energy from Planck, JCAP 11, 022, arXiv:1311.2131 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Li and X

    Y.-H. Li and X. Zhang, Large-scale stable interacting dark energy model: Cosmological perturbations and ob- servational constraints, Phys. Rev. D89, 083009 (2014), arXiv:1312.6328 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Yang and L

    W. Yang and L. Xu, Testing coupled dark energy with large scale structure observation, JCAP 08, 034, arXiv:1401.5177 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    Yang and L

    W. Yang and L. Xu, Cosmological constraints on in- teracting dark energy with redshift-space distortion af- ter Planck data, Phys. Rev. D 89, 083517 (2014), arXiv:1401.1286 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Salvatelli, N

    V. Salvatelli, N. Said, M. Bruni, A. Melchiorri, and D. Wands, Indications of a late-time interaction in the dark sector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 181301 (2014), arXiv:1406.7297 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Y. Wang, D. Wands, G.-B. Zhao, and L. Xu, Post- P lanckconstraints on interacting vacuum energy, Phys. Rev. D 90, 023502 (2014), arXiv:1404.5706 [astro- ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  25. [33]

    E.-K. Li, Y. Zhang, and J.-L. Geng, Modified holo- graphic Ricci dark energy coupled to interacting relativistic and non-relativistic dark matter in the nonflat universe, Phys. Rev. D 90, 083534 (2014), arXiv:1412.5482 [gr-qc]

    2014 arXiv

  26. [34]

    S. Pan, S. Bhattacharya, and S. Chakraborty, An an- alytic model for interacting dark energy and its obser- vational constraints, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 452, 3038 (2015), arXiv:1210.0396 [gr-qc]

    2015 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Li, J.-F

    Y.-H. Li, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Testing mod- els of vacuum energy interacting with cold dark mat- ter, Phys. Rev. D 93, 023002 (2016), arXiv:1506.06349 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  28. [36]

    J.-L. Cui, L. Yin, L.-F. Wang, Y.-H. Li, and X. Zhang, A closer look at interacting dark energy with statefinder hierarchy and growth rate of structure, JCAP 09, 024, arXiv:1503.08948 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  29. [37]

    R. C. G. Landim, Coupled dark energy: a dynamical analysis with complex scalar field, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 31 (2016), arXiv:1507.00902 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  30. [38]

    W. Yang, H. Li, Y. Wu, and J. Lu, Cosmological constraints on coupled dark energy, JCAP 10, 007, arXiv:1608.07039 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  31. [39]

    B. Wang, E. Abdalla, F. Atrio-Barandela, and D. Pavon, Dark Matter and Dark Energy Interactions: Theoretical Challenges, Cosmological Implications and Observational Signatures, Rept. Prog. Phys. 79, 096901 (2016), arXiv:1603.08299 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  32. [40]

    R. C. Nunes, S. Pan, and E. N. Saridakis, New constraints on interacting dark energy from cos- mic chronometers, Phys. Rev. D 94, 023508 (2016), arXiv:1605.01712 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  33. [41]

    van de Bruck, J

    C. van de Bruck, J. Mifsud, and J. Morrice, Testing coupled dark energy models with their cosmological background evolution, Phys. Rev. D 95, 043513 (2017), arXiv:1609.09855 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Xia and S

    D.-M. Xia and S. Wang, Constraining interacting dark energy models with latest cosmological observa- tions, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 463, 952 (2016), arXiv:1608.04545 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Pan and G

    S. Pan and G. Sharov, A model with interaction of dark components and recent observational data, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 472, 4736 (2017), arXiv:1609.02287 [gr-qc]

    2017 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Fay, Constraints from growth-rate data on some cou- pled dark energy models mimicking a ΛCDM expan- sion, Mon

    S. Fay, Constraints from growth-rate data on some cou- pled dark energy models mimicking a ΛCDM expan- sion, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 460, 1863 (2016), arXiv:1605.01644 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Kumar and R

    S. Kumar and R. C. Nunes, Echo of interactions in the dark sector, Phys. Rev. D96, 103511 (2017), arXiv:1702.02143 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Di Valentino, A

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, and O. Mena, Can in- teracting dark energy solve the H0 tension?, Phys. Rev. D 96, 043503 (2017), arXiv:1704.08342 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  39. [47]

    G. S. Sharov, S. Bhattacharya, S. Pan, R. C. Nunes, and S. Chakraborty, A new interacting two fluid model and its consequences, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 466, 3497 (2017), arXiv:1701.00780 [gr-qc]. 14

    2017 arXiv

  40. [48]

    W. Yang, N. Banerjee, and S. Pan, Constraining a dark matter and dark energy interaction scenario with a dy- namical equation of state, Phys. Rev. D 95, 123527 (2017), arXiv:1705.09278 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  41. [49]

    W. Yang, S. Pan, and D. F. Mota, Novel approach to- ward the large-scale stable interacting dark-energy mod- els and their astronomical bounds, Phys. Rev. D 96, 123508 (2017), arXiv:1709.00006 [astro-ph.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  42. [50]

    S. Pan, A. Mukherjee, and N. Banerjee, Astronomical bounds on a cosmological model allowing a general in- teraction in the dark sector, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 477, 1189 (2018), arXiv:1710.03725 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Mifsud and C

    J. Mifsud and C. Van De Bruck, Probing the imprints of generalized interacting dark energy on the growth of perturbations, JCAP 11, 001, arXiv:1707.07667 [astro- ph.CO]

    arXiv

  44. [52]

    Van De Bruck and J

    C. Van De Bruck and J. Mifsud, Searching for dark matter - dark energy interactions: going beyond the conformal case, Phys. Rev. D 97, 023506 (2018), arXiv:1709.04882 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  45. [53]

    W. Yang, S. Pan, and J. D. Barrow, Large-scale Sta- bility and Astronomical Constraints for Coupled Dark- Energy Models, Phys. Rev. D 97, 043529 (2018), arXiv:1706.04953 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  46. [54]

    W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, R. C. Nunes, S. Vagnozzi, and D. F. Mota, Tale of stable interacting dark energy, observational signatures, and the H0 ten- sion, JCAP 09, 019, arXiv:1805.08252 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  47. [55]

    W. Yang, S. Pan, R. Herrera, and S. Chakraborty, Large-scale (in) stability analysis of an exactly solved coupled dark-energy model, Phys. Rev. D 98, 043517 (2018), arXiv:1808.01669 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  48. [56]

    H. Li, W. Yang, Y. Wu, and Y. Jiang, New limits on cou- pled dark energy model after Planck 2015, Phys. Dark Univ. 20, 78 (2018)

    2015

  49. [57]

    B. J. Barros, Kinetically coupled dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 99, 064051 (2019), arXiv:1901.03972 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  50. [58]

    E. M. Teixeira, A. Nunes, and N. J. Nunes, Conformally Coupled Tachyonic Dark Energy, Phys. Rev. D 100, 043539 (2019), arXiv:1903.06028 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Di Valentino, A

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, O. Mena, and S. Vagnozzi, Nonminimal dark sector physics and cos- mological tensions, Phys. Rev. D 101, 063502 (2020), arXiv:1910.09853 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Paliathanasis, S

    A. Paliathanasis, S. Pan, and W. Yang, Dynamics of nonlinear interacting dark energy models, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 28, 1950161 (2019), arXiv:1903.02370 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  53. [61]

    W. Yang, S. Pan, R. C. Nunes, and D. F. Mota, Dark calling Dark: Interaction in the dark sector in presence of neutrino properties after Planck CMB final release, JCAP 04, 008, arXiv:1910.08821 [astro-ph.CO]

    1910 arXiv

  54. [62]

    S. Pan, W. Yang, E. Di Valentino, E. N. Saridakis, and S. Chakraborty, Interacting scenarios with dynamical dark energy: Observational constraints and alleviation of the H0 tension, Phys. Rev. D 100, 103520 (2019), arXiv:1907.07540 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Nakamura, R

    S. Nakamura, R. Kase, and S. Tsujikawa, Coupled vec- tor dark energy, JCAP 12, 032, arXiv:1907.12216 [gr- qc]

    1907 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Di Valentino, A

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, O. Mena, and S. Vagnozzi, Interacting dark energy in the early 2020s: A promising solution to the H0 and cosmic shear tensions, Phys. Dark Univ. 30, 100666 (2020), arXiv:1908.04281 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  57. [65]

    W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, B. Wang, and A. Wang, Forecasting interacting vacuum-energy models using gravitational waves, JCAP 05, 050, arXiv:1904.11980 [astro-ph.CO]

    1904 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Kumar, R

    S. Kumar, R. C. Nunes, and S. K. Yadav, Dark sec- tor interaction: a remedy of the tensions between CMB and LSS data, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 576 (2019), arXiv:1903.04865 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Martinelli, N

    M. Martinelli, N. B. Hogg, S. Peirone, M. Bruni, and D. Wands, Constraints on the interacting vacuum- geodesic CDM scenario, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 488, 3423 (2019), arXiv:1902.10694 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  60. [68]

    A. A. Costa et al., J-PAS: forecasts on interacting dark energy from baryon acoustic oscillations and redshift- space distortions, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 488, 78 (2019), arXiv:1901.02540 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Arevalo, A

    F. Arevalo, A. Cid, L. P. Chimento, and P. Mella, On sign-changeable interaction in FLR W cosmology, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 355 (2019), arXiv:1901.04300 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  62. [70]

    S. Pan, W. Yang, C. Singha, and E. N. Saridakis, Ob- servational constraints on sign-changeable interaction models and alleviation of the H0 tension, Phys. Rev. D 100, 083539 (2019), arXiv:1903.10969 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Cheng, Y.-Z

    G. Cheng, Y.-Z. Ma, F. Wu, J. Zhang, and X. Chen, Testing interacting dark matter and dark energy model with cosmological data, Phys. Rev. D 102, 043517 (2020), arXiv:1911.04520 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  64. [72]

    V. K. Oikonomou, Generalized logarithmic equation of state in classical and loop quantum cosmology dark en- ergy–dark matter coupled systems, Annals Phys. 409, 167934 (2019), arXiv:1907.02600 [gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Kase and S

    R. Kase and S. Tsujikawa, Scalar-Field Dark Energy Nonminimally and Kinetically Coupled to Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D 101, 063511 (2020), arXiv:1910.02699 [gr- qc]

    2020 arXiv

  66. [74]

    S. Pan, G. S. Sharov, and W. Yang, Field theoretic in- terpretations of interacting dark energy scenarios and recent observations, Phys. Rev. D 101, 103533 (2020), arXiv:2001.03120 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  67. [75]

    G´ omez-Valent, V

    A. G´ omez-Valent, V. Pettorino, and L. Amendola, Up- date on coupled dark energy and the H0 tension, Phys. Rev. D 101, 123513 (2020), arXiv:2004.00610 [astro- ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Di Valentino and O

    E. Di Valentino and O. Mena, A fake Interacting Dark Energy detection?, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 500, L22 (2020), arXiv:2009.12620 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  69. [77]

    W. Yang, E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, and R. C. Nunes, All-inclusive interacting dark sector cosmologies, Phys. Rev. D 101, 083509 (2020), arXiv:2001.10852 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Lucca and D

    M. Lucca and D. C. Hooper, Shedding light on dark matter-dark energy interactions, Phys. Rev. D 102, 123502 (2020), arXiv:2002.06127 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Di Valentino, A

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, O. Mena, S. Pan, and W. Yang, Interacting Dark Energy in a closed uni- verse, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 502, L23 (2021), arXiv:2011.00283 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  72. [80]

    N. B. Hogg, M. Bruni, R. Crittenden, M. Martinelli, and S. Peirone, Latest evidence for a late time vac- uum–geodesic CDM interaction, Phys. Dark Univ. 29, 100583 (2020), arXiv:2002.10449 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Yao and X.-H

    Y.-H. Yao and X.-H. Meng, A new coupled three-form dark energy model and implications for the H0 tension, Phys. Dark Univ. 30, 100729 (2020), arXiv:2205.14928 15 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, D

    J. Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, D. Bettoni, D. Figueruelo, F. A. Teppa Pannia, and S. Tsujikawa, Velocity-dependent interacting dark energy and dark matter with a La- grangian description of perfect fluids, JCAP 03, 085, arXiv:2012.12204 [astro-ph.CO]

    2012 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Yao and X.-H

    Y. Yao and X.-H. Meng, Relieve the H0 tension with a new coupled generalized three-form dark energy model, Phys. Dark Univ. 33, 100852 (2021), arXiv:2011.09160 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Lucca, Dark energy–dark matter interactions as a solution to the S8 tension, Phys

    M. Lucca, Dark energy–dark matter interactions as a solution to the S8 tension, Phys. Dark Univ. 34, 100899 (2021), arXiv:2105.09249 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Lucca, Multi-interacting dark energy and its cosmo- logical implications, Phys

    M. Lucca, Multi-interacting dark energy and its cosmo- logical implications, Phys. Rev. D 104, 083510 (2021), arXiv:2106.15196 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  78. [86]

    R. C. Nunes and E. Di Valentino, Dark sector inter- action and the supernova absolute magnitude tension, Phys. Rev. D 104, 063529 (2021), arXiv:2107.09151 [astro-ph.CO]

    2021 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Gariazzo, E

    S. Gariazzo, E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, and R. C. Nunes, Late-time interacting cosmologies and the Hub- ble constant tension, Phys. Rev. D 106, 023530 (2022), arXiv:2111.03152 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Potting and P

    R. Potting and P. M. S´ a, Coupled quintessence with a generalized interaction term, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 31, 2250111 (2022), arXiv:2112.07608 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  81. [89]

    P. M. S´ a, Late-time evolution of the Universe within a two-scalar-field cosmological model, Phys. Rev. D 103, 123517 (2021), arXiv:2103.01693 [gr-qc]

    2021 arXiv

  82. [90]

    da Fonseca, T

    V. da Fonseca, T. Barreiro, and N. J. Nunes, A sim- ple parametrisation for coupled dark energy, Phys. Dark Univ. 35, 100940 (2022), arXiv:2104.14889 [astro- ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Gao, Z.-W

    L.-Y. Gao, Z.-W. Zhao, S.-S. Xue, and X. Zhang, Reliev- ing the H 0 tension with a new interacting dark energy model, JCAP 07, 005, arXiv:2101.10714 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  84. [92]

    Thipaksorn, S

    W. Thipaksorn, S. Sapa, and K. Karwan, Coupled dark energy model inspired from general conformal transformation, Phys. Rev. D 105, 063527 (2022), arXiv:2201.03261 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  85. [93]

    G´ omez-Valent, Z

    A. G´ omez-Valent, Z. Zheng, L. Amendola, C. Wetterich, and V. Pettorino, Coupled and uncoupled early dark en- ergy, massive neutrinos, and the cosmological tensions, Phys. Rev. D 106, 103522 (2022), arXiv:2207.14487 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Harko, K

    T. Harko, K. Asadi, H. Moshafi, and H. Sheikhahmadi, Observational constraints on the interacting dark en- ergy — Dark matter (IDM) cosmological models, Phys. Dark Univ. 38, 101131 (2022), arXiv:2203.08907 [gr-qc]

    2022 arXiv

  87. [95]

    M. G. Yengejeh, S. Fakhry, J. T. Firouzjaee, and H. Fathi, The integrated Sachs–Wolfe effect in interact- ing dark matter–dark energy models, Phys. Dark Univ. 39, 101144 (2023), arXiv:2206.01030 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  88. [96]

    R. C. Nunes, S. Vagnozzi, S. Kumar, E. Di Valentino, and O. Mena, New tests of dark sector interactions from the full-shape galaxy power spectrum, Phys. Rev. D 105, 123506 (2022), arXiv:2203.08093 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  89. [97]

    R. G. Landim, Note on interacting holographic dark energy with a Hubble-scale cutoff, Phys. Rev. D 106, 043527 (2022), arXiv:2206.10205 [astro-ph.CO]

    2022 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Yao and X.-H

    Y.-H. Yao and X.-H. Meng, Can interacting dark energy with dynamical coupling resolve the Hubble tension, Phys. Dark Univ. 39, 101165 (2023), arXiv:2207.05955 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Li, S.-J

    T.-N. Li, S.-J. Jin, H.-L. Li, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Prospects for Probing the Interaction between Dark En- ergy and Dark Matter Using Gravitational-wave Dark Sirens with Neutron Star Tidal Deformation, Astrophys. J. 963, 52 (2024), arXiv:2310.15879 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Giar` e, Y

    W. Giar` e, Y. Zhai, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, R. C. Nunes, and C. van de Bruck, Tightening the reins on nonmin- imal dark sector physics: Interacting dark energy with dynamical and nondynamical equation of state, Phys. Rev. D 110, 063527 (2024), arXiv:2404.02110 [astro- ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Kritpetch, N

    C. Kritpetch, N. Roy, and N. Banerjee, Interacting dark sector: A dynamical system perspective, Phys. Rev. D 111, 103501 (2025), arXiv:2405.10604 [gr-qc]

    2025 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Giar` e, M

    W. Giar` e, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes, and E. Di Valentino, Interacting Dark Energy after DESI Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 251003 (2024), arXiv:2404.15232 [astro- ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Li, P.-J

    T.-N. Li, P.-J. Wu, G.-H. Du, S.-J. Jin, H.-L. Li, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Constraints on Interacting Dark Energy Models from the DESI Baryon Acoustic Oscil- lation and DES Supernovae Data, Astrophys. J. 976, 1 (2024), arXiv:2407.14934 [astro-ph.CO]

    2024 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Halder, S

    S. Halder, S. Pan, P. M. S´ a, and T. Saha, Coupled phan- tom cosmological model motivated by the warm infla- tionary paradigm, Phys. Rev. D 110, 063529 (2024), arXiv:2407.15804 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Carrion, A

    K. Carrion, A. Spurio Mancini, D. Piras, and J. C. Hi- dalgo, Testing interacting dark energy with Stage IV cosmic shear surveys through differentiable neural em- ulators, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 539, 3220 (2025), arXiv:2410.10603 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Giani, R

    L. Giani, R. Von Marttens, and R. Camilleri, Novel Approach to Cosmological Nonlinearities as an Ef- fective Fluid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 071004 (2025), arXiv:2410.15295 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Tsedrik et al

    M. Tsedrik et al. , Interacting dark energy constraints from the full-shape analyses of BOSS DR12 and DES Year 3 measurements (2025), arXiv:2502.03390 [astro- ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  100. [108]

    K. Liu, X. Fu, B. Xu, C. Ding, Y. Huang, and X. Qing, The growth of linear perturbations in the interact- ing dark energy models and observational constraints (2025), arXiv:2503.05208 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  101. [109]

    Y. Zhai, M. de Cesare, C. van de Bruck, E. Di Valentino, and E. Wilson-Ewing, A low-redshift preference for an interacting dark energy model (2025), arXiv:2503.15659 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Li, G.-H

    T.-N. Li, G.-H. Du, Y.-H. Li, P.-J. Wu, S.-J. Jin, J.- F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Probing the sign-changeable interaction between dark energy and dark matter with DESI baryon acoustic oscillations and DES supernovae data (2025), arXiv:2501.07361 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  103. [111]

    Silva, M

    E. Silva, M. A. Sabogal, M. Scherer, R. C. Nunes, E. Di Valentino, and S. Kumar, New constraints on interacting dark energy from DESI DR2 BAO observations, Phys. Rev. D 111, 123511 (2025), arXiv:2503.23225 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  104. [112]

    C. You, D. Wang, and T. Yang, Dynamical dark energy implies a coupled dark sector: Insights from DESI DR2 via a data-driven approach, Phys. Rev. D 112, 043503 (2025), arXiv:2504.00985 [astro-ph.CO]. 16

    2025 arXiv

  105. [113]

    K. Aoki, J. Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, M. C. Pookkillath, and S. Tsujikawa, Effective field theory of coupled dark en- ergy and dark matter (2025), arXiv:2504.17293 [astro- ph.CO]

    2025

  106. [114]

    W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, D. F. Mota, and S. Chakraborty, Probing the cold nature of dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 111, 103509 (2025), arXiv:2504.11973 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  107. [115]

    Abedin, G.-J

    M. Abedin, G.-J. Wang, Y.-Z. Ma, and S. Pan, In search of an interaction in the dark sector through Gaussian Process and ANN approaches (2025), arXiv:2505.04336 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  108. [116]

    S. Pan, S. Paul, E. N. Saridakis, and W. Yang, Interact- ing dark energy after DESI DR2: a challenge for ΛCDM paradigm? (2025), arXiv:2504.00994 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025

  109. [117]

    W. Liu, Y. Wu, S. Pan, and W. Yang, Solving an inter- acting quintessence model with a sound horizon initial condition and its observational constraints, JHEAp 47, 100403 (2025)

    2025

  110. [118]

    Y. Yang, X. Dai, and Y. Wang, New cosmological con- straints on the evolution of dark matter energy den- sity, Phys. Rev. D111, 103534 (2025), arXiv:2505.09879 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  111. [119]

    Li and X

    Y.-H. Li and X. Zhang, Cosmic Sign-Reversal: Non- Parametric Reconstruction of Interacting Dark En- ergy with DESI DR2 (2025), arXiv:2506.18477 [astro- ph.CO]

    2025

  112. [120]

    H. Yan, Y. Pan, J.-X. Wang, W.-X. Xu, and Z.- H. Peng, Investigating Interacting Dark Energy Mod- els Using Fast Radio Burst Observations (2025), arXiv:2507.16308 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  113. [121]

    Wang, R.-G

    J.-Q. Wang, R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo, and S.-J. Wang, Resolving the Planck-DESI tension by non-minimally coupled quintessence (2025), arXiv:2508.01759 [astro- ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  114. [122]

    W. Yang, O. Mena, S. Pan, and E. Di Valentino, Dark sectors with dynamical coupling, Phys. Rev. D 100, 083509 (2019), arXiv:1906.11697 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  115. [123]

    E. M. Barboza, Jr. and J. S. Alcaniz, A parametric model for dark energy, Phys. Lett. B 666, 415 (2008), arXiv:0805.1713 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  116. [124]

    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]

    2018 arXiv

  117. [125]

    Aghanim et al

    N. Aghanim et al. (Planck), Planck 2018 results. V. CMB power spectra and likelihoods, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A5 (2020), arXiv:1907.12875 [astro-ph.CO]

    2018 arXiv

  118. [126]

    Abdul Karim et al

    M. Abdul Karim et al. (DESI), DESI DR2 Results II: Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations and Cos- mological Constraints (2025), arXiv:2503.14738 [astro- ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  119. [127]

    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

  120. [128]

    Rubin et al

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

    2023 arXiv

  121. [129]

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

    2024 arXiv

  122. [130]

    Lewis, A

    A. Lewis, A. Challinor, and A. Lasenby, Efficient com- putation of CMB anisotropies in closed FR W models, Astrophys. J. 538, 473 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9911177

    2000 arXiv

  123. [131]

    Howlett, A

    C. Howlett, A. Lewis, A. Hall, and A. Challinor, CMB power spectrum parameter degeneracies in the era of precision cosmology, JCAP 04, 027, arXiv:1201.3654 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  124. [132]

    Torrado and A

    J. Torrado and A. Lewis, Cobaya: Code for Bayesian Analysis of hierarchical physical models, JCAP 05, 057, arXiv:2005.05290 [astro-ph.IM]

    2005 arXiv

  125. [133]

    Gelman and D

    A. Gelman and D. B. Rubin, Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences, Statist. Sci. 7, 457 (1992)

    1992

  126. [134]

    Heavens, Y

    A. Heavens, Y. Fantaye, A. Mootoovaloo, H. Eg- gers, Z. Hosenie, S. Kroon, and E. Sellentin, Marginal Likelihoods from Monte Carlo Markov Chains (2017), arXiv:1704.03472 [stat.CO]

    2017 arXiv

  127. [135]

    R. E. Kass and A. E. Raftery, Bayes Factors, J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 90, 773 (1995)

    1995

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.