Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 49 references

A layered dark sector with a structuring field can suppress late-time small-scale structure enough to ease the S8 tension while leaving CMB and BAO untouched.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-13 17:13 UTC pith:NP2FSV4G

load-bearing objection Coherent SIDM packaging for S8, but the relief is tuned into a linear-virial ansatz the authors themselves call back-of-the-envelope. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2603.27095 v3 pith:NP2FSV4G submitted 2026-03-28 stat.AP

Socioeconomic Drivers of Physical Morbidity Across U.S. Counties: A Spatial Causal Inference Approach

Ranadeep Daw , Hunter N. Evans , Indrabati Bhattacharya This is my paper
classification stat.AP
keywords S8 tensiondark sectorscale-dependent growthinert doubleteffective sound speedmatter power spectrumBoltzmann codethermal relic density
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper argues that the S8 tension—higher matter clustering amplitude inferred from the cosmic microwave background than from late-time weak lensing—can be eased without modifying gravity or the background expansion. It introduces Layered Dark Sectors with a Structuring Field (LDS–SF), in which a multi-component dark sector’s internal coupling matrix produces a dominant eigenvalue λ(k) that makes structure growth scale-dependent. A concrete realization is given by a Z4-symmetric inert-doublet–plus-singlet model: integrating out a heavy inert-doublet mediator yields an effective sound speed for a ~60 GeV singlet that acts like dark pressure on small scales. Implemented in a Boltzmann code with a late-time activation that projects virialized-halo properties into linear theory, the model leaves recombination-era physics intact, suppresses the matter power spectrum only for z < 10 and k > 0.1 h/Mpc, and brings predicted σ8 into roughly 1σ agreement with KiDS-1000 and DES for a continuous family of mediator masses and couplings that also satisfy the thermal relic density.

Core claim

The LDS–SF framework, realized in a Z4-symmetric inert doublet–singlet model, generates targeted late-time (z < 10), small-scale (k > 0.1 h/Mpc) suppression of the matter power spectrum that brings predicted S8/σ8 into ~1σ agreement with KiDS-1000 and DES while remaining consistent with Planck CMB, BAO, and thermal relic density for a continuous corridor of mediator masses 100–300 GeV.

What carries the argument

The dominant eigenvalue λ(k) of the multi-layer dark-sector perturbation matrix; once mapped to an effective sound speed cs² via the Z4-IDSM EFT, it sources a scale-dependent growth factor D(k,z) that suppresses power only where needed.

Load-bearing premise

That the nonlinear physics of virialized halos can be faithfully represented inside linear Boltzmann equations by a fixed overdensity boost, a single characteristic velocity, and a hand-chosen late-time activation function, with all halo-to-halo scatter absorbed into one fitted coupling ratio.

What would settle it

A full multi-fluid N-body simulation of the same Z4-IDSM parameters that fails to reproduce the claimed late-time small-scale power suppression (or that produces detectable early-universe or BAO deviations) would falsify the linear-mapping claim.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • If correct, S8 can be lowered by internal dark-sector dynamics alone, without altering General Relativity or the ΛCDM background expansion.
  • A continuous corridor of mediator masses (100–300 GeV) and portal couplings simultaneously satisfies relic density, direct-detection bounds, and the required σ8 suppression.
  • CMB lensing remains nearly indistinguishable from ΛCDM at multipoles ≲ 500, with only mild high-ℓ deviations, so current CMB data cannot rule the model out.
  • Future Stage-IV surveys (DESI, Euclid) can distinguish the LDS–SF growth history from modified-gravity alternatives that produce similar late-time suppression.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same λ(k) mechanism could be realized in other multi-component dark-matter models (not only Z4-IDSM), provided their perturbation matrix yields a comparable spectral gap.
  • If the linear-to-nonlinear mapping is only approximate, dedicated N-body runs would be the next decisive test before claiming a full resolution of S8.
  • Because the background is pure ΛCDM, any residual H0 tension would still require a separate early- or late-time modification.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces the Layered Dark Sectors with a Structuring Field (LDS–SF) framework, in which scale-dependent structure growth arises from the dominant eigenvalue λ(k) of a multi-component dark-sector perturbation matrix while preserving a standard ΛCDM background and GR. It realizes the idea in a Z4-symmetric inert doublet–singlet model (Z4-IDSM) with a ~60 GeV singlet DM candidate, integrates out a heavy inert-doublet mediator to an effective sound speed c_s², implements the system in CLASS with a late-time activation function that injects virialized-halo properties into linear perturbations, and checks relic density with micrOMEGAs. Across nine mediator-mass benchmarks (100–300 GeV), the model is claimed to leave recombination-era observables intact while suppressing the late-time (z < 10), small-scale (k ≳ 0.1 h/Mpc) matter power spectrum enough to bring σ8/S8 into ~1σ agreement with KiDS-1000 and DES, remaining consistent with Planck, BAO, and thermal relic density.

Significance. If the mapping from microphysics to the linear growth function is reliable, the work would supply a particle-physics-motivated, GR-preserving route to the S8 tension that is continuous across a corridor of mediator masses rather than an isolated point. Concrete strengths include an explicit 6×6 eigenmode analysis with a demonstrated spectral gap, a documented CLASS implementation, a full set of nine benchmarks with power-spectrum, CMB-lensing, and relic-density diagnostics, and an explicit scaling symmetry (λ_eff²/M_H2²) that organizes the viable region. These elements make the proposal falsifiable by Stage-IV growth and lensing data and by next-generation direct-detection experiments near the neutrino floor. The result is therefore of genuine interest to both cosmology and dark-sector model building, provided the load-bearing phenomenological steps can be placed on firmer footing.

major comments (4)
  1. §III, Eqs. (34)–(36): The central S8 claim rests on projecting nonlinear virialized-halo physics into linear CLASS perturbations by the replacements ρ_S → Δ_vir ρ_cdm (Δ_vir ≃ 178), v = v_vir ≃ 270 km s⁻¹, and multiplication by a hand-chosen tanh activation f_active(z) with z_trans = 2, Δz = 0.2. The text itself labels these “back-of-the-envelope estimates” and “a phenomenological prescription, not a direct PS calculation,” and defers a full nonlinear treatment to future N-body work. Because the subsequent fit of λ_eff²/M_H2² is performed inside this ansatz, the claimed late-time, small-scale suppression is not yet an independent prediction of the Z4-IDSM; it is an output of the linear-activation map. A quantitative validation (or a controlled sensitivity study) of this map is required before the continuous corridor of “viable” mediator masses can be regarded as resolving S8.
  2. §V and Table I / Fig. 12: The growth coupling g = 1.791 is “determined by fitting late-time growth-rate (RSD) data,” and for each mediator mass the portal couplings are “adjusted to maintain S8 consistency” so that λ_eff²/M_H2² yields σ8 ≈ 0.76–0.77. The scaling symmetry then guarantees that any pair preserving the ratio produces identical late-time observables. Consequently the nine-benchmark “family of solutions” is largely by construction once the target σ8 is chosen; the paper should either (i) fix the microphysical couplings from particle-physics considerations alone and predict σ8, or (ii) clearly reframe the exercise as a phenomenological existence proof rather than a predictive resolution of the tension.
  3. §III–IV and the discussion of k ≳ 0.1 h/Mpc: The S8 signal receives substantial contributions from mildly nonlinear scales, yet the entire analysis is performed inside linear Boltzmann theory. The text notes the scale separation between the suppression scale (~60 Mpc) and typical virial radii, but does not quantify residual nonlinear corrections to the windowed σ8 or to fσ8. Until N-body or hybrid calculations are supplied, the quantitative claim of 1σ agreement with KiDS/DES remains provisional.
  4. §III, Eqs. (25)–(33): The derivation of c_s² proceeds through a chain of order-of-magnitude kinetic-theory relations (M ~ λ_eff²/M_H2², σ_T ~ …, ⟨v_eff²⟩ ~ Γ/H, P ~ ρ⟨v²⟩/3, …). While the scaling with λ_eff²/M_H2² is transparent, the numerical prefactors that set the absolute amplitude of suppression are not under quantitative control. A more rigorous matching (or an explicit statement of the uncertainty budget on those prefactors) is needed for a precision-cosmology claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. The title, abstract, and arXiv identifier supplied in the submission materials describe an entirely different statistics paper on county-level socioeconomic drivers of physical morbidity, while the body is a hep-ph cosmology manuscript (arXiv:2603.27096). This mismatch must be corrected before any further review cycle.
  2. Notation for the structuring field (φ versus the inert-doublet fluctuations) and for the two layers is introduced in several places with slightly different conventions; a single consistent glossary would help.
  3. Figures 13–39 are numerous and largely repetitive; a compact multi-panel summary of the nine benchmarks (P(k), C_ℓ^ϕϕ ratio, relic-density slice) would improve readability without loss of information.
  4. The CLASS modifications (new entries in perturbations.c, background.c, gauge kernels) are described only at a high level; a short appendix or public repository link would aid reproducibility.
  5. Several references appear with incomplete bibliographic data (e.g., DESI 2024 entries); these should be updated to the published versions where available.

Circularity Check

4 steps flagged

S8 alleviation is obtained by fitting g and λ²_eff/M²_H2 to late-time growth/S8 data, so the claimed resolution is largely by construction of the fit rather than an independent prediction of the Z4-IDSM.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [§V (Structural Stability and Eigenmode Evolution), paragraph on g]
    "The value g=1.791 is determined by fitting late-time growth-rate (RSD) data after fixing the background expansion using Planck-compressed CMB and BAO constraints. Once fixed, g is held constant across all redshifts and scales, with no per-epoch or per-scale tuning."

    g appears in the LDS–SF perturbation matrix and controls the dominant eigenvalue λ(k) and therefore the scale-dependent growth rate. Fitting g to RSD/fσ8 data and then presenting improved agreement with those same growth-rate measurements as a model prediction is circular for that observable: the match is forced by the fit.

  2. fitted input called prediction [§IV Parameter Space; Table I; Fig. 12 and Benchmarks I–IX]
    "For each point, the portal couplings λ_S2, λ_S12, and λ_S21 are adjusted to maintain S8 consistency, with λ²_eff = λ²_S2 + 2λ²_S12 spanning 0.34 to 3.0. ... Figure 12 presents the central result of this survey: the dependence of σ8 on λ²_eff across all nine benchmark masses. ... the shaded band at σ8 ≈ 0.75–0.79 indicates the 1σ preference region from KiDS-1000 and DES"

    Portal couplings are tuned, for every mediator mass, so that the resulting σ8 lands inside the KiDS/DES preferred band. The paper then claims the model 'successfully alleviate[s] the S8 tension' and exhibits a continuous corridor of viable points. Because the target σ8 is an input to the coupling choice, the alleviation is obtained by construction, not predicted by the Z4-IDSM Lagrangian.

  3. fitted input called prediction [§III Derivation of the Effective Sound Speed, Eqs. (34)–(36) and surrounding text]
    "ρ_S → Δ_vir ρ_cdm(a), Δ_vir = 18π² ≃ 178. ... we adopt a conservative prescription with constant v = v_vir ... f_active(z) = ½[1 − tanh((z − z_trans)/Δz)] with z_trans = 2 and Δz = 0.2. ... These are back-of-the-envelope estimates ... a phenomenological prescription, not a direct PS calculation. ... the model is self-calibrating: varying v_vir by factor of O(1) is absorbed into the fitted λ²_eff/M²_H2 ratio without affecting observables due to the scaling symmetry"

    The only bridge from microscopic portal couplings to the macroscopic c²_s that suppresses structure is a hand-chosen linear projection (fixed overdensity, fixed virial velocity, tanh activation). The paper states that O(1) uncertainty in those choices is absorbed into the single fitted ratio λ²_eff/M²_H2. Consequently the claimed scale and redshift of suppression—and the S8 relief that follows—are outputs of the phenomenological map plus the fit, not independent predictions of the particle dynamics.

  4. fitted input called prediction [§V (scaling symmetry discussion after Fig. 12)]
    "For a fixed ratio λ²_eff/M²_H2, the effective sound speed c²_s (and consequently all late-time cosmological observables) remain invariant. This manifests in Fig. 12 as a systematic separation of curves: heavier mediators require proportionally larger λ²_eff to achieve equivalent σ8 suppression ... The scaling symmetry dramatically reduces fine-tuning: rather than isolated points, the viable parameter space forms continuous corridors where any combination of M_H2 and λ_eff preserving their ratio yields identical cosmological predictions."

    Once the ratio is chosen to produce the desired σ8, the scaling symmetry guarantees that every point on the corridor gives the same late-time observables. The 'continuous family of solutions' that alleviate S8 is therefore the level set of the fitted ratio, not a set of independently successful predictions.

full rationale

The paper's central cosmological claim—that the Z4-IDSM realization of LDS–SF produces targeted late-time small-scale suppression bringing σ8/S8 into ~1σ of KiDS-1000/DES while remaining consistent with Planck/BAO—is not an independent prediction of the particle model. The growth-controlling coupling g is explicitly fitted to RSD data; for each mediator mass the portal couplings are adjusted so that λ²_eff/M²_H2 yields σ8 in the weak-lensing band; and a scaling symmetry then guarantees identical late-time observables along that ratio. The micro-to-macro map itself (fixed Δ_vir≃178, v_vir≃270 km/s, hand-chosen tanh activation at z_trans=2) is admitted to be a phenomenological back-of-the-envelope projection whose O(1) uncertainties are absorbed into the same fitted ratio. Relic-density and direct-detection checks are independent and non-circular, and there is no load-bearing self-citation uniqueness chain; the circularity is confined to the S8/growth claim, which reduces by construction to the fitted inputs. Score 7 reflects partial but central circularity: the headline result is forced by the fit, while other viability tests remain free.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 6 axioms · 3 invented entities

The central S8 claim depends on a stack of free parameters (g, λ_eff per mass, activation and virial constants), standard cosmological and QFT background, plus paper-specific modeling axioms that replace multi-fluid nonlinear dynamics with a single-fluid linear c_s². Invented framing entities (LDS–SF, structuring field as organizing principle, dominant λ(k) as the mechanism) carry the narrative but have limited independent handles beyond the same fitted suppression. Counts below measure what is added versus what is imported or tuned.

free parameters (6)
  • g (LDS–SF growth coupling) = 1.791
    Fixed to 1.791 by fitting RSD/fσ8 data after Planck+BAO background; controls dominant eigenvalue and scale-dependent growth.
  • λ_eff² (portal effective coupling) = 0.34–3.00 (mass-dependent)
    Adjusted per mediator mass (0.34–3.00 across benchmarks) to achieve target σ8/S8 suppression; only the ratio λ_eff²/M_H2² is cosmologically fixed.
  • z_trans, Δz (activation function) = z_trans=2, Δz=0.2
    Hand-chosen tanh transition (z_trans=2, Δz=0.2) that turns on virialized sound speed after recombination; not derived from first principles.
  • Δ_vir and v_vir = Δ_vir≃178; v_vir≃270 km/s
    Fixed spherical-collapse overdensity ≃178 and galaxy-group velocity dispersion ≃270 km/s used inside linear c_s²; O(1) uncertainty absorbed into λ_eff²/M_H2².
  • m_S (singlet DM mass) = 60 GeV
    Fixed at 60 GeV to sit on Higgs-portal relic resonance; shapes allowed λ_S1 and direct-detection story.
  • Mediator mass grid M_H2 = 100–300 GeV (25 GeV steps)
    Scanned 100–300 GeV in 25 GeV steps with mass splittings +50 GeV; defines the nine benchmarks rather than a continuous posterior.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Background expansion and GR remain exactly ΛCDM; dark-sector interactions only affect perturbations via an effective fluid.
    Stated throughout §§I–II and used to keep CMB/BAO distances standard while only modifying growth.
  • ad hoc to paper Heavy-mediator limit yields a contact EFT fully captured by a single isotropic c_s² in linear theory.
    §III derivation collapses portals into c_s² and implements only that in CLASS; multi-fluid and higher multipoles are deferred.
  • ad hoc to paper Virialized halo properties can be coarse-grained into homogeneous linear perturbations via Δ_vir, v_vir, and f_active(z).
    Eqs. 34–36; authors acknowledge this is a phenomenological projection, not a Press–Schechter calculation.
  • standard math Standard synchronous/Newtonian perturbation theory and CLASS hierarchy remain valid with the modified dark sector.
    §II–IV follow Ma–Bertschinger and CLASS conventions; used for eigenmode matrix and power spectra.
  • domain assumption Z4 symmetry stabilizes the singlet as late-time DM and allows inert doublet to act only as structuring mediator.
    §III model definition; taken from inert-doublet–singlet literature [38,39].
  • domain assumption One-loop RGE vacuum instability at Λ_UV ~ 10^8 GeV is irrelevant for z ≲ 10^3 cosmology.
    Appendix A; used to treat Z4-IDSM as a valid EFT for the claimed observables.
invented entities (3)
  • Layered Dark Sectors with a Structuring Field (LDS–SF) no independent evidence
    purpose: Organize multi-component dark matter so that a dominant eigenmode λ(k) produces scale-dependent growth without modified gravity.
    Named framework of the paper; largely a rephrasing of coupled multi-fluid DM plus a mediator, with limited independent evidence beyond the fitted growth effect.
  • Structuring field φ (and its identification with inert doublet fluctuations) no independent evidence
    purpose: Mediate inter-layer couplings and generate k-dependent terms in the perturbation matrix.
    Introduced in the action (§II) then identified with H2 in the Z4 realization; no separate detection channel beyond the same portals that set c_s².
  • Dominant eigenmode λ(k) as the essential LDS–SF mechanism no independent evidence
    purpose: Claim that scale dependence emerges from the sector’s perturbation-matrix topology rather than an imposed parameter.
    §II eigenanalysis; in the implemented pipeline growth is still controlled by the fitted c_s²/g, so λ(k) is not an independent observable handle.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 26700 in / 4757 out tokens · 58669 ms · 2026-07-13T17:13:38.453108+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Socioeconomic Drivers of Physical Morbidity Across U.S. Counties: A Spatial Causal Inference Approach." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NP2FSV4G

@misc{pith2026260327095,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Socioeconomic Drivers of Physical Morbidity Across U.S. Counties: A Spatial Causal Inference Approach},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NP2FSV4G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.27095}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Identifying the causal effects of socioeconomic determinants on population health is of many great interests - from statistical methodology development to public health practitioners and policy developments. The statistical side of the problem needs to address several questions: spatial autocorrelation in both exposures and outcomes, confounding between treatments and covariates, and the need for geographically logical inference. We address these jointly by using spectral basis functions - Moran Eigenvector Maps and ICAR precision matrix eigenvectors - within a doubly robust generalized propensity score estimator for continuous treatments. Applied to 2022 county health data across the U.S. counties, the framework identifies the effect of six chosen predictors on the average physically unhealthy days per month. Possible further applications and methodological extensions are also discussed as future directions from this research.

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    P. J. E. Peebles,Principles of Physical Cosmology, Princeton University Press (1993)

    1993

  2. [2]

    Weinberg,Cosmology, Oxford University Press (2008)

    S. Weinberg,Cosmology, Oxford University Press (2008)

    2008

  3. [3]

    Dodelson,Modern Cosmology, Academic Press (2003)

    S. Dodelson,Modern Cosmology, Academic Press (2003)

    2003

  4. [4]

    Mukhanov,Physical Foundations of Cosmology, Cambridge University Press (2005)

    V. Mukhanov,Physical Foundations of Cosmology, Cambridge University Press (2005)

    2005

  5. [5]

    Ma and E

    C.-P. Ma and E. Bertschinger,Cosmological Perturbation Theory in the Synchronous and Conformal Newtonian Gauges, Astrophys. J. 455, 7 (1995)

    1995

  6. [6]

    N. G. Deshpande and E. Ma,Pattern of Symmetry Breaking with Two Higgs Doublets, Phys. Rev. D 18, 2574 (1978)

    1978

  7. [7]

    Verde, T

    L. Verde, T. Treu, and A. Riess,Tensions between the Early and Late Universe, Nature Astronomy 3, 891 (2019)

    2019

  8. [8]

    Zhao et al.,Dynamical dark energy in light of the latest observations, Nat

    G.-B. Zhao et al.,Dynamical dark energy in light of the latest observations, Nat. Astron. 1, 627 (2017)

    2017

  9. [9]

    Aghanim et al

    N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration),Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020)

    2018

  10. [10]

    Heymans et al.,KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi-probe weak lensing and relative clustering analysis, Astron

    C. Heymans et al.,KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi-probe weak lensing and relative clustering analysis, Astron. Astrophys. 646, A140 (2021)

    2021

  11. [11]

    T. M. C. Abbott et al. (DES Collaboration),Dark Energy Survey Year 3 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy clustering and weak lensing, Phys. Rev. D 105, 023520 (2022)

    2022

  12. [12]

    Aghanim et al

    N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration),Planck 2018 results. VIII. Gravitational lensing, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A8 (2020)

    2018

  13. [13]

    G. L. Bryan and M. L. Norman,Statistical Properties of X-ray Clusters: Analytic and Numerical Comparisons, Astrophys. J.495, 80 (1998)

    1998

  14. [14]

    H. J. Mo and S. D. M. White,An analytic model for the spatial clustering of dark matter halos, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.282, 347 (1996)

    1996

  15. [15]

    J. S. Bullock et al.,Profiles of dark haloes: evolution, scatter, and environment, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 321, 559 (2001)

    2001

  16. [16]

    Abdalla et al.,The Dark Sector Cosmology, Phys

    E. Abdalla et al.,The Dark Sector Cosmology, Phys. Rept. 512, 1 (2012)

    2012

  17. [17]

    Zimdahl et al.,Models of Interacting Dark Energy, AIP Conference Proceedings 1471, 51 (2012)

    W. Zimdahl et al.,Models of Interacting Dark Energy, AIP Conference Proceedings 1471, 51 (2012)

    2012

  18. [18]

    Wang et al.,Dark Matter and Dark Energy Interactions: Theoretical Challenges, Cosmological Implications and Observational Signatures, Phys

    B. Wang et al.,Dark Matter and Dark Energy Interactions: Theoretical Challenges, Cosmological Implications and Observational Signatures, Phys. Rev. D 76, 103516 (2007)

    2007

  19. [19]

    Bœhm and P

    C. Bœhm and P. Fayet,Scalar dark matter candidates, Nucl. Phys. B 683, 219 (2004)

    2004

  20. [20]

    M. P. Hertzberg,The Effective Field Theory of Dark Matter and Structure Formation: Semi-Analytical Results, JCAP 11 (2012) 037

    2012

  21. [21]

    Koivisto,Growth of perturbations in dark matter coupled with quintessence, Phys

    T. Koivisto,Growth of perturbations in dark matter coupled with quintessence, Phys. Rev. D 72, 043516 (2005)

    2005

  22. [22]

    J. H. He, B. Wang, and E. Abdalla,Effects of Interaction between dark energy and dark matter, Phys. Lett. B 671, 139 (2009)

    2009

  23. [23]

    J. J. M. Carrasco, M. P. Hertzberg, and L. Senatore, The Effective Field Theory of Cosmological Large Scale Structures, JHEP 09 (2012) 082

    2012

  24. [24]

    Cyr-Racine et al.,ETHOS – an effective theory of structure formation, JCAP 02 (2016) 045

    F.-Y. Cyr-Racine et al.,ETHOS – an effective theory of structure formation, JCAP 02 (2016) 045

    2016

  25. [25]

    Egana-Ugrinovic et al.,Cosmological evolution of self-interacting dark matter, Phys

    D. Egana-Ugrinovic et al.,Cosmological evolution of self-interacting dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 104, 063505 (2021)

    2021

  26. [26]

    Lesgourgues,The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) I: Overview, arXiv:1104.2932 [astro-ph.IM]

    J. Lesgourgues,The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) I: Overview, arXiv:1104.2932 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  27. [27]

    D. Blas, J. Lesgourgues, and T. Tram,CLASS II: Approximation schemes, JCAP 07 (2011) 034

    2011

  28. [28]

    Lesgourgues and T

    J. Lesgourgues and T. Tram,The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) IV: Efficient implementation of non-cold relics, JCAP 09 (2011) 032

    2011

  29. [29]

    Lewis, A

    A. Lewis, A. Challinor, and A. Lasenby,Efficient Computation of CMB anisotropies in closed FRW model, Astrophys. J. 538, 473 (2000)

    2000

  30. [30]

    B´ elanger et al.,micrOMEGAs5.0 : freeze-in, Comput

    G. B´ elanger et al.,micrOMEGAs5.0 : freeze-in, Comput. Phys. Commun. 231, 173 (2018)

    2018

  31. [31]

    H. J. Mo, F. C. van den Bosch, and S. D. M. White, Galaxy Formation and Evolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2010

    2010

  32. [32]

    Hu and I

    W. Hu and I. Sawicki,Models of f(R) cosmic acceleration that evade solar-system tests, Phys. Rev. D 76, 064004 (2007)

    2007

  33. [33]

    Gleyzes et al.,Essential Building Blocks of Dark Energy, JCAP 08 (2013) 025

    J. Gleyzes et al.,Essential Building Blocks of Dark Energy, JCAP 08 (2013) 025

    2013

  34. [34]

    Hu,Lecture Notes on CMB Theory, arXiv:0802.3688 (Astro-PH)

    W. Hu,Lecture Notes on CMB Theory, arXiv:0802.3688 (Astro-PH)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  35. [35]

    Baumann,Cosmology Lectures: Perturbation Theory, Cambridge Lecture Notes (2011)

    M. Baumann,Cosmology Lectures: Perturbation Theory, Cambridge Lecture Notes (2011)

    2011

  36. [36]

    D. J. Eisenstein and W. Hu,Baryonic Features in the Matter Transfer Function, Astrophys. J. 496, 605 (1998)

    1998

  37. [37]

    Koyama,Cosmological Tests of Modified Gravity, Rep

    K. Koyama,Cosmological Tests of Modified Gravity, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 046902 (2016)

    2016

  38. [38]

    B´ elanger, A

    G. B´ elanger, A. Mjallal, A. Pukhov, and R. Ziegler,Two dark matter candidates: the case of inert doublet and singlet scalars, Phys. Rev. D 105, 035018 (2022)

    2022

  39. [39]

    M. O. Khojali, A. Abdalgabar, A. Ahriche, and A. S. Cornell,Dark matter in a singlet-extended inert Higgs-doublet model, Phys. Rev. D 106, 095039 (2022)

    2022

  40. [40]

    Alam et al

    S. Alam et al. (BOSS Collaboration),The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III DR12 galaxy sample, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 470, 2617 (2017)

    2017

  41. [41]

    Alam et al

    S. Alam et al. (DESI Collaboration),The Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic 21 Survey: Cosmological Implications from two Decades of Spectroscopic Surveys at the Apache Point observatory, Phys. Rev. D 103, 083533 (2021)

    2021

  42. [42]

    A. G. Adamek et al. (DESI Collaboration),DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological Constraints from the Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations, JCAP 02 (2025) 021

    2024

  43. [43]

    Aalbers et al

    J. Aalbers et al. (LZ Collaboration),First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041002 (2023)

    2023

  44. [44]

    Aprile et al

    E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration),First Dark Matter Search with Nuclear Recoils from the XENONnT Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041003 (2023)

    2023

  45. [45]

    Aprile et al

    E. Aprile et al. (XENON Collaboration),Dark Matter Search Results from a One Tonne×Year Exposure of XENON1T, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 111302 (2018)

    2018

  46. [46]

    C. A. J. O’Hare,Fog on the horizon: a new definition of the neutrino floor for direct dark matter searches, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 251802 (2021)

    2021

  47. [47]

    Combined measurements of Higgs boson production and decay using up to 139 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data at √s= 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS experiment,

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), “Combined measurements of Higgs boson production and decay using up to 139 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data at √s= 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS experiment,” Phys. Lett. B786, 114 (2018)

    2018

  48. [48]

    Search for long-lived charginos decaying to neutralinos and charged pions in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV,

    A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), “Search for long-lived charginos decaying to neutralinos and charged pions in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV,” Eur. Phys. J. C82, 902 (2022)

    2022

  49. [49]

    W. H. Press and P. Schechter,Formation of Galaxies and Clusters of Galaxies by Self-Similar Gravitational Condensation, Astrophys. J.187, 425 (1974)

    1974