pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2603.23564 · v1 · submitted 2026-03-24 · 🌀 gr-qc · hep-th

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Energy conditions of bouncing solutions in quadratic curvature gravity coupled with a scalar field

Yuki Hashimoto , Kazuharu Bamba , Sanjay Mandal
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 01:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc hep-th
keywords bouncing cosmologyenergy conditionsquadratic gravityscalar fieldnonsingular solutionsmodified gravitycosmological bounce
0
0 comments X

The pith

In quadratic curvature gravity with a scalar field, bouncing solutions satisfy null, weak, and dominant energy conditions when the tensor is sourced only by the scalar field, but violate the strong condition during the bounce.

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

The paper checks the classical energy conditions in nonsingular bouncing cosmologies that arise in quadratic curvature gravity minimally coupled to a scalar field. It compares two ways of writing the energy-momentum tensor: one that attributes everything to the scalar field alone, and an effective version that folds in the quadratic curvature corrections. Under the scalar-field version the null, weak, and dominant conditions hold at every epoch while the strong condition is violated only at the bounce, which is what lets the universe turn around without hitting a singularity. Under the effective version all four conditions fail near the bounce, showing that the higher-curvature terms are what make the bounce possible.

Core claim

In the scalar-field description, the null, weak, and dominant energy conditions remain satisfied throughout the cosmological evolution, while the strong energy condition is necessarily violated during the bounce phase, enabling the avoidance of the initial singularity. In contrast, when the effective energy-momentum tensor is considered, all four energy conditions are violated near the bounce, highlighting the intrinsically non-Einsteinian nature of the underlying gravitational dynamics.

What carries the argument

The two formulations of the energy-momentum tensor: one sourced solely by the scalar field, the other an effective tensor that includes the quadratic curvature corrections.

If this is right

  • Violation of only the strong energy condition in the scalar-field picture is sufficient to produce a nonsingular bounce.
  • Higher-curvature corrections force violations of all energy conditions when treated as part of an effective tensor.
  • The two formulations give different pictures of which energy conditions are required to break for singularity avoidance.
  • Nonsingular evolution is possible in this theory while preserving the null, weak, and dominant conditions in one consistent description.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The split between formulations suggests that energy-condition statements in higher-order gravity are interpretation-dependent rather than absolute.
  • Similar selective violations could be examined in other modified-gravity models that support bounces.
  • Observational probes sensitive to early-universe energy densities might distinguish which formulation better matches data.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen bouncing solutions satisfy the modified field equations exactly, and both the scalar-field-only and effective formulations of the energy-momentum tensor are physically valid.

What would settle it

A direct numerical check, using the explicit scale-factor and scalar-field profiles near the bounce, of whether the strong energy condition can stay non-negative while the Hubble parameter still changes sign.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.23564 by Kazuharu Bamba, Sanjay Mandal, Yuki Hashimoto.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Evolution of the scalar fields in the FLRW spacetime. T [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Evolution of the background variables using the same [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Evolution of the scalar-field energy-condition indi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Evolution of the effective-fluid energy-condition in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We examine the validity of classical energy conditions in nonsingular bouncing cosmological solutions arising in quadratic curvature gravity minimally coupled to a scalar field. Focusing on the null, weak, strong, and dominant energy conditions, we perform a systematic analysis under two distinct formulations of the energy-momentum tensor. In the first approach, the energy-momentum tensor is assumed to be sourced solely by the scalar field, whereas in the second, an effective energy-momentum tensor is constructed that incorporates the higher-curvature corrections characterizing deviations from general relativity. Our results reveal that, in the scalar-field description, the null, weak, and dominant energy conditions remain satisfied throughout the cosmological evolution, while the strong energy condition is necessarily violated during the bounce phase, enabling the avoidance of the initial singularity. In contrast, when the effective energy-momentum tensor is considered, all four energy conditions are violated near the bounce, highlighting the intrinsically non-Einsteinian nature of the underlying gravitational dynamics. These findings clarify the role of higher-order curvature terms in facilitating nonsingular cosmological bounces, providing important insights into the energy condition violations required in modified theories of gravity.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines the validity of the null, weak, strong, and dominant energy conditions in nonsingular bouncing cosmological solutions within quadratic curvature gravity minimally coupled to a scalar field. It performs a systematic analysis under two formulations of the energy-momentum tensor: one sourced solely by the scalar field, and an effective tensor that incorporates the higher-curvature corrections. The central results are that, in the scalar-field description, the null, weak, and dominant conditions remain satisfied throughout the evolution while the strong condition is violated at the bounce, whereas all four conditions are violated near the bounce when the effective tensor is used.

Significance. If the computations hold, this work clarifies how quadratic curvature terms enable nonsingular bounces by inducing effective energy-condition violations while preserving standard conditions in the matter sector. The explicit distinction between the two tensor formulations and the focus on concrete bouncing solutions constitute a strength, providing concrete insight into the non-Einsteinian dynamics required for singularity avoidance in modified gravity.

major comments (1)
  1. [Bouncing solutions and field equations] The analysis assumes the chosen bouncing solutions satisfy the modified field equations derived from the quadratic action. An explicit verification (or reference to the derivation) that the scale-factor ansatz and scalar-field profile solve the full set of equations without post-hoc parameter adjustments is needed to confirm that the reported energy-condition violations are not artifacts of the ansatz choice.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from stating the explicit form of the quadratic curvature action and the functional form of the bouncing scale factor used in the analysis.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation of our manuscript and for the constructive comment on the verification of the bouncing solutions. We address the major comment below and will incorporate the requested clarification in the revised version.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The analysis assumes the chosen bouncing solutions satisfy the modified field equations derived from the quadratic action. An explicit verification (or reference to the derivation) that the scale-factor ansatz and scalar-field profile solve the full set of equations without post-hoc parameter adjustments is needed to confirm that the reported energy-condition violations are not artifacts of the ansatz choice.

    Authors: We agree that explicit verification strengthens the presentation. The scale-factor and scalar-field profiles employed in the manuscript were obtained by direct substitution into the modified field equations of quadratic curvature gravity (derived from the action in Sec. II) and solved for the parameter values that permit a nonsingular bounce; no post-hoc adjustments were made. To address the referee's concern, we will add an explicit verification step in the revised manuscript (new subsection in Sec. III) showing that the ansatz satisfies the full set of equations identically for the chosen parameters, thereby confirming that the reported energy-condition results follow directly from the dynamics. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation follows from explicit computation

full rationale

The paper derives its results on energy condition violations by direct substitution of the chosen bouncing scale-factor solutions into the modified Einstein equations under two explicit definitions of the energy-momentum tensor (scalar-field only versus effective including quadratic terms). These steps are algebraic evaluations of the null, weak, strong, and dominant conditions at each epoch; they do not reduce to fitted parameters renamed as predictions, self-definitional loops, or load-bearing self-citations whose validity is presupposed. The distinction between the two tensor formulations is stated explicitly in the field equations and is not smuggled in via prior ansatz. Any self-citations present are peripheral and do not carry the central claim.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, the paper relies on standard assumptions of modified gravity and cosmology without introducing new free parameters or invented entities in the summary provided.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The modified field equations of quadratic curvature gravity minimally coupled to a scalar field admit nonsingular bouncing solutions.
    Invoked when the authors state that such solutions exist and then examine their energy conditions.
  • domain assumption The two formulations of the energy-momentum tensor (scalar-field only and effective) are both legitimate for checking classical energy conditions.
    Central to the comparison performed in the paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5495 in / 1438 out tokens · 63980 ms · 2026-05-15T01:11:19.310249+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages · 46 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    75 1.00 ρ φ + P φ [ M 4 Pl ] × 10 −21 Null Energy Condition (scalar field φ ) NEC: ρ φ + P φ Bounce (a) NEC: ρ ϕ +Pϕ −300 −200 −100 0 100 200 300 τ ≡ m ( t − t b ) −4.424672 −4.424671 −4.424670 −4.424669 −4.424668 ρ φ + 3 P φ [ M 4 Pl ] × 10 −15 Strong Energy Condi ion (scalar field φ ) SEC: ρ φ + 3 P φ Bounce (b) SEC: ρ ϕ + 3Pϕ −300 −200 −100 0 100 200 3...

    work page

  2. [2]

    75 1.00 ρ φ + P φ [ M 4 Pl ] × 10 −21 (c) WEC: ρ ϕ and ρ ϕ +Pϕ −300 −200 −100 0 100 200 300 τ ≡ m ( t − t b ) 0.00

    work page

  3. [3]

    75 1.00 ρ φ − | P φ | [ M 4 Pl ] × 10 −21 Dominant Energy Condition (scalar field φ ) DEC: ρ φ − | P φ | Bounce (d) DEC: ρ ϕ − | Pϕ | FIG. 4. Evolution of the scalar-field energy-condition indi cators, using the same parameters and initial conditions as in Fig. 1. The horizontal axis in all pa nels is τ ≡ m(t − tb), and the vertical dashed line marks the b...

    work page

  4. [4]

    A. H. Guth, Phys. Rev. D 23, 347 (1981)

    work page 1981

  5. [5]

    Sato, Mon

    K. Sato, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 195, 467 (1981)

    work page 1981

  6. [6]

    A. A. Starobinsky, Phys. Lett. B 91, 99 (1980)

    work page 1980

  7. [7]

    A. D. Linde, Phys. Lett. B 108, 389 (1982)

    work page 1982

  8. [8]

    Sato and J

    K. Sato and J. Yokoyama, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24, 1530025 (2015)

    work page 2015

  9. [9]

    Y. A. et al. [Planck Collaboration], Astron. Astrophys. 641, A10 (2020), arXiv:1807.06211 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  10. [10]

    The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Power Spectra, Likelihoods and $\Lambda$CDM Parameters

    T. Louis et al. (Atacama Cosmology Telescope), JCAP 11, 062, arXiv:2503.14452 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    Kallosh, A

    R. Kallosh, A. Linde, and D. Roest, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 161001 (2025), arXiv:2503.21030 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    D. S. Zharov, O. O. Sobol, and S. I. Vilchinskii, Phys. Rev . D 112, 023544 (2025), arXiv:2505.01129 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Drees and Y

    M. Drees and Y. Xu, Phys. Lett. B 867, 139612 (2025), arXiv:2504.20757 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Addazi, Y

    A. Addazi, Y. Aldabergenov, and S. V. Ketov, Phys. Lett. B 869, 139883 (2025), arXiv:2505.10305 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Introduction to Modified Gravity and Gravitational Alternative for Dark Energy

    S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, eConf C0602061, 06 (2006), [Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 4, 115 (2007)], arXiv:hep-th/0601213 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  16. [16]

    Dark Energy and Gravity

    T. Padmanabhan, Gen. Rel. Grav. 40, 529 (2008), arXiv:0705.2533 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  17. [17]

    T. P. Sotiriou and V. Faraoni, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 451 (2010), arXiv:0805.1726 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  18. [18]

    A. D. Felice and S. Tsujikawa, Living Rev. Rel. 13, 3 (2010), arXiv:1002.4928 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  19. [19]

    Extended Theories of Gravity

    S. Capozziello and M. D. Laurentis, Phys. Rept. 509, 167 (2011), arXiv:1108.6266 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  20. [20]

    Unified cosmic history in modified gravity: from F(R) theory to Lorentz non-invariant models

    S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Rept. 505, 59 (2011), arXiv:1011.0544 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  21. [21]

    Beyond the Cosmological Standard Model

    A. Joyce, B. Jain, J. Khoury, and M. Trodden, Phys. Rept. 568, 1 (2015), arXiv:1407.0059 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  22. [22]

    Nojiri, S

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Rep t. 692, 1 (2017), arXiv:1705.11098 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  23. [23]

    Inflationary cosmology in modified gravity theories

    K. Bamba and S. D. Odintsov, Symmetry 7, 220 (2015), arXiv:1503.00442 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  24. [24]

    S. D. Odintsov, V. K. Oikonomou, I. Giannakoudi, F. P. Fr onimos, and E. C. Lymperiadou, Symmetry 15, 1701 (2023), arXiv:2307.16308 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  25. [25]

    S. W. Hawking and R. Penrose, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 314, 529 (1970)

    work page 1970

  26. [26]

    Minimal conditions for the creation of a Friedman-Robertson-Walker universe from a "bounce"

    C. Molina-Paris and M. Visser, Phys. Lett. B 455, 90 (1999), arXiv:gr-qc/9810023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  27. [27]

    Bouncing Cosmologies

    M. Novello and S. E. P. Bergliaffa, Phys. Rept. 463, 127 (2008), arXiv:0802.1634 [astro-ph]. 15

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  28. [28]

    Bouncing Cosmologies: Progress and Problems

    R. Brandenberger and P. Peter, Found. Phys. 47, 797 (2017), arXiv:1603.05834 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  29. [29]

    Bouncing Universes in String-inspired Gravity

    T. Biswas, A. Mazumdar, and W. Siegel, JCAP 03, 009, arXiv:hep-th/0508194 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [30]

    Y.-F. Cai, T. Qiu, Y.-S. Piao, M. Li, and X. Zhang, JHEP 10, 071, arXiv:0704.1090 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  31. [31]

    Y.-F. Cai, D. A. Easson, and R. Brandenberger, JCAP 08, 020, arXiv:1206.2382 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  32. [32]

    Matter Bounce in Horava-Lifshitz Cosmology

    R. Brandenberger, Phys. Rev. D 80, 043516 (2009), arXiv:0904.2835 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  33. [33]

    A Nonsingular Cosmology with a Scale-Invariant Spectrum of Cosmological Perturbations from Lee-Wick Theory

    Y.-F. Cai, T.-t. Qiu, R. Brandenberger, and X.-m. Zhang , Phys. Rev. D 80, 023511 (2009), arXiv:0810.4677 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  34. [34]

    Y.-F. Cai, T. Qiu, J.-Q. Xia, H. Li, and X. Zhang, Phys. Re v. D 79, 021303 (2009), arXiv:0808.0819 [astro-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  35. [35]

    Raychaudhuri, Phys

    A. Raychaudhuri, Phys. Rev. 98, 1123 (1955)

    work page 1955

  36. [36]

    The Raychaudhuri equations: a brief review

    S. Kar and S. SenGupta, Pramana 69, 49 (2007), arXiv:gr-qc/0611123

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  37. [37]

    Curiel, Einstein Stud

    E. Curiel, Einstein Stud. 13, 43 (2017), arXiv:1405.0403 [physics.hist-ph]

    work page arXiv 2017

  38. [38]

    General Relativistic Energy Conditions: The Hubble expansion in the epoch of galaxy formation

    M. Visser, Phys. Rev. D 56, 7578 (1997), arXiv:gr-qc/9705070

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  39. [39]

    M. K. Parikh, JHEP 10, 089, arXiv:1501.04606 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  40. [40]

    A Critical Review of Classical Bouncing Cosmologies

    D. Battefeld and P. Peter, Phys. Rept. 571, 1 (2015), arXiv:1406.2790 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  41. [41]

    Generic instabilities of non-singular cosmologies in Horndeski theory: a no-go theorem

    T. Kobayashi, Phys. Rev. D 94, 043511 (2016), arXiv:1606.05831 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  42. [42]

    Generalized Galileons: instabilities of bouncing and Genesis cosmologies and modified Genesis

    M. Libanov, S. Mironov, and V. Rubakov, JCAP 08, 037, arXiv:1605.05992 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  43. [43]

    S. M. Carroll, M. Hoffman, and M. Trodden, Phys. Rev. D 68, 023509 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0301273

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  44. [44]

    S. D. H. Hsu, A. Jenkins, and M. B. Wise, Phys. Lett. B 597, 270 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0406043

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  45. [45]

    Null energy condition and superluminal propagation

    S. Dubovsky, T. Gregoire, A. Nicolis, and R. Rattazzi, J HEP 03, 025, arXiv:hep-th/0512260

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  46. [46]

    R. V. Buniy and S. D. H. Hsu, Phys. Lett. B 632, 543 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0502203

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  47. [47]

    D. A. Easson, I. Sawicki, and A. Vikman, JCAP 11, 021, arXiv:1109.1047 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  48. [48]

    T. Qiu, J. Evslin, Y.-F. Cai, M. Li, and X. Zhang, JCAP 10, 036, arXiv:1108.0593 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  49. [49]

    G. W. Horndeski, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 10, 363 (1974)

    work page 1974

  50. [50]

    Healthy theories beyond Horndeski

    J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza, and F. Vernizzi, Phy s. Rev. Lett. 114, 211101 (2015), arXiv:1404.6495 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  51. [51]

    Ijjas and P

    A. Ijjas and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Lett. B 764, 289 (2017), arXiv:1609.01253 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2017

  52. [52]

    R. P. Woodard, Scholarpedia 10, 32243 (2015), arXiv:1506.02210 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  53. [53]

    Whitt, Phys

    B. Whitt, Phys. Lett. B 145, 176 (1984)

    work page 1984

  54. [54]

    A. D. Dolgov and M. Kawasaki, Phys. Lett. B 573, 1 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0307285

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  55. [55]

    Bounce cosmology from $F(R)$ gravity and $F(R)$ bigravity

    K. Bamba, A. N. Makarenko, A. N. Myagky, S. Nojiri, and S. D. Odintsov, JCAP 01, 008, arXiv:1309.3748 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  56. [56]

    Bouncing Cosmologies in Palatini $f(R)$ Gravity

    C. Barragan, G. J. Olmo, and H. Sanchis-Alepuz, Phys. Re v. D 80, 024016 (2009), arXiv:0907.0318 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  57. [57]

    S. D. Odintsov and V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Rev. D 92, 024016 (2015), arXiv:1504.06866 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  58. [58]

    S. K. Tripathy, R. K. Khuntia, and P. Parida, Eur. Phys. J . Plus 134, 504 (2019), arXiv:1905.09477 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  59. [59]

    J. K. Singh, Shaily, A. Singh, A. Beesham, and H. Shabani , Annals Phys. 455, 169382 (2023), arXiv:2304.11578 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  60. [60]

    Sahoo, S

    P. Sahoo, S. Bhattacharjee, S. K. Tripathy, and P. K. Sah oo, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 35, 2050095 (2020), arXiv:1907.08682 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2020

  61. [61]

    Koussour, N

    M. Koussour, N. Myrzakulov, J. Rayimbaev, A. H. A. Alfed eel, and H. M. Elkhair, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 21, 2450184 (2024), arXiv:2403.15772 [gr-qc]. 16

    work page arXiv 2024

  62. [62]

    V. K. Bhardwaj, A. Pradhan, N. Ahmed, and A. A. Shaker, Ca n. J. Phys. 100, 475 (2022), arXiv:2206.10113 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    S. Das, P. Dunsby, S. S. Haque, and S. Tema, Phys. Rev. D 112, 104059 (2025), arXiv:2507.00242 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Güngör and G

    Ö. Güngör and G. D. Starkman, JCAP 04, 003, arXiv:2011.05133 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2011

  65. [65]

    Daniel, M

    R. Daniel, M. Campbell, C. van de Bruck, and P. Dunsby, JC AP 06, 030, arXiv:2212.01093 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv

  66. [66]

    Energy conditions in f(R)-gravity

    J. Santos, J. S. Alcaniz, M. J. Reboucas, and F. C. Carval ho, Phys. Rev. D 76, 083513 (2007), arXiv:0708.0411 [astro-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  67. [67]

    Energy Conditions and Stability in $f(R)$ theories of gravity with non-minimal coupling to matter

    O. Bertolami and M. C. Sequeira, Phys. Rev. D 79, 104010 (2009), arXiv:0903.4540 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  68. [68]

    The role of energy conditions in $f(R)$ cosmology

    S. Capozziello, S. Nojiri, and S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Let t. B 781, 99 (2018), arXiv:1803.08815 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  69. [69]

    f(R,L_m) gravity

    T. Harko and F. S. N. Lobo, Eur. Phys. J. C 70, 373 (2010), arXiv:1008.4193 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  70. [70]

    The matter Lagrangian and the energy-momentum tensor in modified gravity with non-minimal coupling between matter and geometry

    T. Harko, Phys. Rev. D 81, 044021 (2010), arXiv:1001.5349 [gr-qc]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  71. [71]

    Arnowitt, S

    R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner, Phys. Rev. 116, 1322 (1959)

    work page 1959

  72. [72]

    R. L. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. W. Misner, Gen. Rel. Grav . 40, 1997 (2008), arXiv:gr-qc/0405109

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  73. [73]

    X. Gao, Y. Wang, R. Brandenberger, and A. Riotto, Phys. R ev. D 81, 083508 (2010), arXiv:0905.3821 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  74. [74]

    Density perturbations in general modified gravitational theories

    A. De Felice, S. Mukohyama, and S. Tsujikawa, Phys. Rev. D 82, 023524 (2010), arXiv:1006.0281 [astro-ph.CO]. 17

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010