pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.22970 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · gr-qc

Cosmological evolution of interacting dark energy with a CPL equation of state

Gerald Neumann , Nelson Videla , Dorian Araya This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 09:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO gr-qc
keywords interacting dark energyCPL parametrizationanalytic solutionsphantom dark energyquintessencetransient accelerationBayesian cosmological constraints
0
0 comments X

The pith

An interacting dark energy model with CPL parametrization and Q proportional to dark energy density yields exact analytic solutions and a modestly better AIC fit to data than the non-interacting case, while showing a phantom-to-quintessence

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

This paper derives closed-form expressions for the energy densities in two interacting dark energy scenarios that use the CPL parametrization for the equation of state. It then confronts the models with current Hubble, supernova, BAO, and CMB data through Bayesian fitting. The interaction tied to dark energy density produces a modest AIC improvement over the non-interacting CPL model, although BIC still selects the simpler Lambda CDM. The favored solution has the dark energy equation of state crossing from phantom values at high redshift to quintessence values today and allows for a possible transient acceleration phase ahead.

Core claim

Exact analytic solutions involving incomplete gamma functions are obtained for the scale-factor dependence of the dark-sector densities when the interaction takes the form Q = beta H rho_de or Q = beta H rho_c. Bayesian analysis of the combined observational data sets shows that the first interaction form improves the fit relative to non-interacting CPL according to the Akaike criterion, yet the Bayesian information criterion continues to favor Lambda CDM. The best-fit parameters indicate that the dark energy equation of state evolves from an effective phantom regime at early times to a quintessence regime at late times, with the possibility that cosmic acceleration is only transient.

What carries the argument

The interaction term Q = beta H rho_de inserted into the continuity equations together with the CPL form w_de(a) = w0 + wa (1 - a), which permits exact integration in terms of incomplete gamma functions.

If this is right

  • The dark energy equation of state transitions from phantom values at high redshift to quintessence values at low redshift.
  • Cosmic acceleration may be only transient rather than a permanent feature of the future universe.
  • The interacting model remains consistent with all current observations despite its extra parameter.
  • The alternative interaction proportional to dark matter density receives no observational support.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The existence of closed-form solutions allows direct study of how interaction strength affects the timing of the phantom-quintessence crossing without relying on numerical integration.
  • If the transition is confirmed, it would imply that the acceleration we observe today is not the final state but could end at some finite future time.
  • Such models enlarge the range of possible expansion histories that still match existing data, suggesting that next-generation surveys sensitive to the expansion rate at intermediate redshifts could detect or exclude the interaction.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that the interaction between dark energy and dark matter must take one of the two specific linear forms proportional to the Hubble rate times one density, and that the CPL parametrization is an adequate description of dark energy evolution.

What would settle it

A future data set that constrains the dark energy equation of state to remain either always phantom or always quintessence without a crossing, or that eliminates any transient acceleration phase, would rule out the preferred interacting solution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22970 by Dorian Araya, Gerald Neumann, Nelson Videla.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: 1D posterior distributions and 2D confidence contours at the 1 view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: 1D posterior distributions and 2D confidence contours to 1 view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: 1D posterior distributions and 2D confidence contours to 1 view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left panel: Reconstruction of the Hubble rate view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left panel: Reconstruction of the Hubble rate view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left panel: Reconstruction of the deceleration parameter view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Redshift evolution of the effective dark energy EoS view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper examines interacting dark energy models within the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder (CPL) parametrization, emphasizing both theoretical structure and observational viability. Two commonly adopted interaction terms are considered: $Q = \beta H \rho_{de}$ and $Q = \beta H \rho_c$. We derive exact analytic solutions that describe how the dark sector evolves. These solutions involve incomplete gamma functions and reveal a non-trivial mathematical structure that is often missed in numerical analyses. We perform a Bayesian analysis using current cosmological observations, including the Hubble parameter (OHD), Type Ia supernovae (SNIa), baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO), and cosmic microwave background (CMB) data. Relative to the non-interacting CPL scenario, the interacting model with $Q = \beta H \rho_{de}$ yields a modestly improved fit, as indicated by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). However, the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) penalizes increased model complexity, leading to a continued preference for $\Lambda$CDM. In contrast, the interaction model that depends on dark matter density does not provide observational support. The preferred interacting scenario indicates that the dark energy equation of state evolves dynamically, transitioning from an effective phantom regime at high redshift to quintessence-like behavior at late times. Further analysis indicates the potential for a transient phase of cosmic acceleration in the future. These findings suggest that interacting dark energy models within the CPL framework enrich the standard cosmological model by introducing more diverse phenomenology while maintaining consistency with current observations.

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 / 3 minor

Summary. The paper examines interacting dark energy models with the CPL parametrization w(a) = w0 + wa(1-a), considering two ad-hoc interaction forms Q = β H ρ_de and Q = β H ρ_c. It derives closed-form analytic solutions for the dark-sector energy densities (involving incomplete gamma functions), performs Bayesian parameter estimation and model comparison (AIC/BIC) against OHD + SNIa + BAO + CMB data, and reports that the Q ∝ ρ_de case yields a modest AIC improvement over non-interacting CPL while BIC continues to favor ΛCDM; the best-fit evolution shows w_de transitioning from phantom-like at high redshift to quintessence-like at late times, with possible future transient acceleration.

Significance. If the statistical results hold, the work supplies a useful analytic treatment of the interacting CPL system that avoids purely numerical integration and yields exact expressions for ρ_de(a) and ρ_c(a). The observational conclusion is appropriately modest: the interacting model is viable and slightly preferred by AIC but does not displace ΛCDM under BIC, thereby adding a controlled phenomenological extension without overclaiming dynamical predictions.

major comments (1)
  1. [Bayesian analysis section] Bayesian analysis section: the reported AIC improvement for the Q = β H ρ_de model is presented without the numerical ΔAIC value, the minimum χ² for each model, the explicit priors on β, w0, wa, or MCMC convergence diagnostics (e.g., Gelman-Rubin R̂ or effective sample size). These omissions make it impossible to verify the robustness of the model-comparison claim that underpins the central observational result.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Analytic solutions] The abstract states that the solutions 'involve incomplete gamma functions' but does not indicate which specific integral (the modified continuity equation for ρ_de) produces the gamma function; a brief reference to the relevant equation in the analytic section would clarify the derivation.
  2. [Results figures] Figure captions for the w_de(z) and q(z) evolution plots should explicitly state whether the curves are evaluated at the best-fit point or include 1σ/2σ bands; without this, the claimed 'transition from phantom to quintessence' and 'transient acceleration' are difficult to assess for robustness.
  3. [Model comparison] The manuscript uses 'modestly improved fit' for the AIC result; quoting the actual ΔAIC (and the corresponding evidence ratio) would make the strength of the improvement quantitative rather than qualitative.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments. We address the major comment below and will make the necessary revisions to improve the presentation of our Bayesian analysis.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Bayesian analysis section] Bayesian analysis section: the reported AIC improvement for the Q = β H ρ_de model is presented without the numerical ΔAIC value, the minimum χ² for each model, the explicit priors on β, w0, wa, or MCMC convergence diagnostics (e.g., Gelman-Rubin R̂ or effective sample size). These omissions make it impossible to verify the robustness of the model-comparison claim that underpins the central observational result.

    Authors: We agree that these details are important for verifying the robustness of our model-comparison results. In the revised manuscript, we will explicitly report the numerical ΔAIC value for the Q = β H ρ_de model (relative to both the non-interacting CPL and ΛCDM cases), the minimum χ² values for all models, the explicit prior ranges adopted for β, w0, and wa, and the MCMC convergence diagnostics (including Gelman-Rubin R̂ and effective sample sizes). revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper adopts two standard phenomenological interaction forms Q = β H ρ_de and Q = β H ρ_c (not derived from first principles), assumes the CPL parametrization w(a) = w0 + wa(1-a), and derives closed-form solutions for the dark-sector densities via integration of the continuity equations, yielding expressions involving incomplete gamma functions. These solutions are mathematically obtained from the input differential equations and do not reduce to the target observables by construction. Bayesian constraints are then obtained from independent datasets (OHD, SNIa, BAO, CMB). The reported features—dynamical transition in w_de and possible future transient acceleration—are direct descriptions of the posterior best-fit parameter values rather than independent predictions or self-referential derivations. No self-definitional loops, load-bearing self-citations, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results occur. The analysis is a conventional model-building and fitting exercise that remains self-contained against external data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on two fitted interaction strengths β and the CPL parameters w0, wa, plus the domain assumption that the chosen interaction forms are physically relevant; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • β
    Dimensionless coupling constant in the interaction term Q = β H ρ_de or Q = β H ρ_c, determined by Bayesian fitting to cosmological data.
  • w0, wa
    Parameters of the CPL equation of state, fitted simultaneously with β.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Dark energy equation of state follows the CPL parametrization w(a) = w0 + wa(1-a).
    Invoked to close the system of differential equations for the interacting densities.
  • domain assumption Interaction rate takes the form Q = β H times one of the dark-sector densities.
    Two specific choices are adopted without derivation from microphysics.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 10290 in / 1614 out tokens · 54662 ms · 2026-05-08T09:51:59.204245+00:00 · methodology

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

108 extracted references · 108 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    General system of equations We consider the conservation equations ˙ρc + 3Hρc =−Q,(A1) ˙ρde + 3Hρde(1 +ω de) =Q,(A2) 15 together with the CPL parametrization ωde(z) =w 0 +w a z 1 +z .(A3) Using the relation d dt =−H(1 +z) d dz , the system becomes (1 +z) dρc dz −3ρ c = Q H ,(A4) dρde dz = 3(1 +w 0) 1 +z + 3waz (1 +z) 2 ρde − Q H(1 +z) .(A5)

    work page

  2. [2]

    Model CI:Q=βHρ de The system reduces to (1 +z) dρc dz −3ρ c =βρ de,(A6) dρde dz = 3(1 +w 0)−β 1 +z + 3waz (1 +z) 2 ρde. (A7) a. Solution forρ de The equation forρ de can be written as 1 ρde dρde dz = 3(1 +w 0)−β 1 +z + 3waz (1 +z) 2 .(A8) Integrating, lnρ de = (3(1 +w0)−β) ln(1 +z) + Z 3waz (1 +z) 2 dz.(A9) Using the change of variableu= 1 +z, Z 3waz (1 +...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Model CII:Q=βHρ c The system becomes (1 +z) dρc dz −3ρ c =βρ c,(A19) dρde dz = 3(1 +w 0) 1 +z + 3waz (1 +z) 2 ρde − βρc 1 +z . (A20) a. Solution forρ c This equation integrates directly, ρc(z) =ρ c,0(1 +z) 3+β.(A21) b. Solution forρ de Substituting into the dark energy equation leads to a first-order linear equation that can be solved using an integrating...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Observational evidence from super- novae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant,

    A. G. Riesset al., “Observational evidence from super- novae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant,”Astron. J., vol. 116, pp. 1009–1038, 1998

    work page 1998

  5. [5]

    Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High Redshift Supernovae,

    S. Perlmutteret al., “Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High Redshift Supernovae,”Astrophys. J., vol. 517, pp. 565–586, 1999

    work page 1999

  6. [6]

    The Complete Light-curve Sam- ple of Spectroscopically Confirmed SNe Ia from Pan- STARRS1 and Cosmological Constraints from the Com- bined Pantheon Sample,

    D. M. Scolnicet al., “The Complete Light-curve Sam- ple of Spectroscopically Confirmed SNe Ia from Pan- STARRS1 and Cosmological Constraints from the Com- bined Pantheon Sample,”Astrophys. J., vol. 859, no. 2, p. 101, 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmolog- ical parameters,

    N. Aghanimet al., “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmolog- ical parameters,”Astron. Astrophys., vol. 641, p. A6,

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    652, C4 (2021)]

    [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    Detection of the Baryon Acous- tic Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Function of SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies,

    D. J. Eisensteinet al., “Detection of the Baryon Acous- tic Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Function of SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies,”Astrophys. J., vol. 633, pp. 560–574, 2005

    work page 2005

  10. [10]

    Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological impli- cations from two decades of spectroscopic surveys at the Apache Point Observatory,

    S. Alamet al., “Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological impli- cations from two decades of spectroscopic surveys at the Apache Point Observatory,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 103, no. 8, p. 083533, 2021

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    DESI 2024 VI: cosmological con- straints from the measurements of baryon acoustic os- cillations,

    A. G. Adameet al., “DESI 2024 VI: cosmological con- straints from the measurements of baryon acoustic os- cillations,”JCAP, vol. 02, p. 021, 2025

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Dynamics of dark energy,

    E. J. Copeland, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa, “Dynamics of dark energy,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, vol. 15, pp. 1753– 1936, 2006

    work page 1936

  13. [13]

    The Cosmological Constant Problem,

    S. Weinberg, “The Cosmological Constant Problem,” Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 61, pp. 1–23, 1989

    work page 1989

  14. [14]

    Everything You Always Wanted To Know About The Cosmological Constant Problem (But Were Afraid To Ask),

    J. Martin, “Everything You Always Wanted To Know About The Cosmological Constant Problem (But Were Afraid To Ask),”Comptes Rendus Physique, vol. 13, pp. 566–665, 2012

    work page 2012

  15. [15]

    Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics be- yond ΛCDM,

    A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. M. Macri, and D. Scolnic, “Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics be- yond ΛCDM,”Astrophys. J., vol. 876, no. 1, p. 85, 2019

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s −1 Mpc−1 Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team,

    A. G. Riesset al., “A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s −1 Mpc−1 Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team,”Astrophys. J. Lett., vol. 934, no. 1, p. L7, 2022

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    Dark Energy Survey year 1 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy cluster- ing and weak lensing,

    T. M. C. Abbottet al., “Dark Energy Survey year 1 results: Cosmological constraints from galaxy cluster- ing and weak lensing,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 98, no. 4, p. 043526, 2018

    work page 2018

  18. [18]

    KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi- probe weak gravitational lensing and spectroscopic galaxy clustering constraints,

    C. Heymanset al., “KiDS-1000 Cosmology: Multi- probe weak gravitational lensing and spectroscopic galaxy clustering constraints,”Astron. Astrophys., vol. 646, p. A140, 2021

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    Tensions be- tween the Early and the Late Universe,

    L. Verde, T. Treu, and A. G. Riess, “Tensions be- tween the Early and the Late Universe,”Nature Astron., vol. 3, p. 891, 2019

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Snowmass2021 - Letter of in- terest cosmology intertwined II: The hubble constant tension,

    E. Di Valentinoet al., “Snowmass2021 - Letter of in- terest cosmology intertwined II: The hubble constant tension,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 131, p. 102605, 2021

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    Cosmology Intertwined III:f σ 8 andS 8,

    E. Di Valentinoet al., “Cosmology Intertwined III:f σ 8 andS 8,”Astropart. Phys., vol. 131, p. 102604, 2021

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    In the realm of the Hubble tension—a review of solutions,

    E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Melchiorri, D. F. Mota, A. G. Riess, and J. Silk, “In the realm of the Hubble tension—a review of solutions,” Class. Quant. Grav., vol. 38, no. 15, p. 153001, 2021

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    Challenges for ΛCDM: An update,

    L. Perivolaropoulos and F. Skara, “Challenges for ΛCDM: An update,”New Astron. Rev., vol. 95, p. 101659, 2022

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    Introduction to modified gravity and gravitational alternative for dark energy,

    S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, “Introduction to modified gravity and gravitational alternative for dark energy,” eConf, vol. C0602061, p. 06, 2006

    work page 2006

  25. [25]

    Modified Gravity and Cosmology,

    T. Clifton, P. G. Ferreira, A. Padilla, and C. Sko- rdis, “Modified Gravity and Cosmology,”Phys. Rept., vol. 513, pp. 1–189, 2012

    work page 2012

  26. [26]

    Dark energy cosmology: the equivalent description via different theoretical models and cosmography tests,

    K. Bamba, S. Capozziello, S. Nojiri, and S. D. Odintsov, “Dark energy cosmology: the equivalent description via different theoretical models and cosmography tests,” Astrophys. Space Sci., vol. 342, pp. 155–228, 2012

    work page 2012

  27. [27]

    Dark Energy Versus Modified Gravity,

    A. Joyce, L. Lombriser, and F. Schmidt, “Dark Energy Versus Modified Gravity,”Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci., vol. 66, pp. 95–122, 2016

    work page 2016

  28. [28]

    Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter,

    M. Chevallier and D. Polarski, “Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, vol. 10, pp. 213–224, 2001

    work page 2001

  29. [29]

    Exploring the expansion history of the universe,

    E. V. Linder, “Exploring the expansion history of the universe,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 90, p. 091301, 2003

    work page 2003

  30. [30]

    DESI DR2 results. II. Measure- ments of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints,

    M. Abdul Karimet al., “DESI DR2 results. II. Measure- ments of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 112, no. 8, p. 083515, 2025

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    DESI 2024: reconstructing dark energy using crossing statistics with DESI DR1 BAO data,

    R. Calderonet al., “DESI 2024: reconstructing dark energy using crossing statistics with DESI DR1 BAO data,”JCAP, vol. 10, p. 048, 2024

    work page 2024

  32. [32]

    Cosmolog- ical constraints on dark energy parametrizations after DESI 2024: Persistent deviation from standard ΛCDM cosmology,

    M. Malekjani, Z. Davari, and S. Pourojaghi, “Cosmolog- ical constraints on dark energy parametrizations after DESI 2024: Persistent deviation from standard ΛCDM cosmology,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 111, no. 8, p. 083547, 2025

    work page 2024

  33. [33]

    Impacts of dark energy on weighing neutrinos after DESI BAO,

    G.-H. Du, P.-J. Wu, T.-N. Li, and X. Zhang, “Impacts of dark energy on weighing neutrinos after DESI BAO,” Eur. Phys. J. C, vol. 85, no. 4, p. 392, 2025

    work page 2025

  34. [34]

    Dynamical dark energy beyond Planck? Constraints from multiple CMB probes, DESI BAO, and type-Ia supernovae,

    W. Giar` e, “Dynamical dark energy beyond Planck? Constraints from multiple CMB probes, DESI BAO, and type-Ia supernovae,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 112, no. 2, p. 023508, 2025

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Cosmological constraints on dark energy models using DESI BAO 2024,

    J. Zheng, D.-C. Qiang, and Z.-Q. You, “Cosmological constraints on dark energy models using DESI BAO 2024,”JCAP, vol. 08, p. 056, 2025

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Comparison of dynamical dark energy with ΛCDM in light of DESI DR2,

    A. N. Ormondroyd, W. J. Handley, M. P. Hobson, and A. N. Lasenby, “Comparison of dynamical dark energy with ΛCDM in light of DESI DR2,” 3 2025

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    To CPL, or not to CPL? What we have not learned about the dark energy equation of state,

    S. Nesseris, Y. Akrami, and G. D. Starkman, “To CPL, or not to CPL? What we have not learned about the dark energy equation of state,” 3 2025. 17

    work page 2025

  38. [38]

    Dynamical dark energy in light of the DESI DR2 baryonic acoustic oscillations measure- ments,

    G. Guet al., “Dynamical dark energy in light of the DESI DR2 baryonic acoustic oscillations measure- ments,”Nature Astron., vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 1879–1889,

    work page

  39. [39]

    9, 1898 (2025)]

    [Erratum: Nature Astron. 9, 1898 (2025)]

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    Challenging the ΛCDM model: 5σevidence for a dynamical dark energy late-time transition,

    M. Scherer, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes, and A. De Fe- lice, “Challenging the ΛCDM model: 5σevidence for a dynamical dark energy late-time transition,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 112, no. 4, p. 043513, 2025

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    Is dark energy dynamical in the DESI era? A critical review,

    S. Capozziello, H. Chaudhary, T. Harko, and G. Mustafa, “Is dark energy dynamical in the DESI era? A critical review,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 51, p. 102196, 2026

    work page 2026

  42. [42]

    Phantom crossing or dark interaction?,

    S. L. Guedezounme, B. R. Dinda, and R. Maartens, “Phantom crossing or dark interaction?,”JCAP, vol. 01, p. 062, 2026

    work page 2026

  43. [43]

    The Cosmon model for an asymp- totically vanishing time dependent cosmological ’con- stant’,

    C. Wetterich, “The Cosmon model for an asymp- totically vanishing time dependent cosmological ’con- stant’,”Astron. Astrophys., vol. 301, pp. 321–328, 1995

    work page 1995

  44. [44]

    Coupled quintessence,

    L. Amendola, “Coupled quintessence,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 62, p. 043511, 2000

    work page 2000

  45. [45]

    Interacting quintessence,

    W. Zimdahl and D. Pavon, “Interacting quintessence,” Phys. Lett. B, vol. 521, pp. 133–138, 2001

    work page 2001

  46. [46]

    Interacting quintessence solution to the coinci- dence problem,

    L. P. Chimento, A. S. Jakubi, D. Pavon, and W. Zim- dahl, “Interacting quintessence solution to the coinci- dence problem,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 67, p. 083513, 2003

    work page 2003

  47. [47]

    Interacting dark matter and dark energy,

    G. R. Farrar and P. J. E. Peebles, “Interacting dark matter and dark energy,”Astrophys. J., vol. 604, pp. 1– 11, 2004

    work page 2004

  48. [48]

    Instabil- ity in interacting dark energy and dark matter fluids,

    J. Valiviita, E. Majerotto, and R. Maartens, “Instabil- ity in interacting dark energy and dark matter fluids,” JCAP, vol. 07, p. 020, 2008

    work page 2008

  49. [49]

    Stability of the curvature perturbation in dark sectors’ mutual inter- acting models,

    J.-H. He, B. Wang, and E. Abdalla, “Stability of the curvature perturbation in dark sectors’ mutual inter- acting models,”Phys. Lett. B, vol. 671, pp. 139–145, 2009

    work page 2009

  50. [50]

    Effects of the interaction be- tween dark energy and dark matter on cosmological pa- rameters,

    J.-H. He and B. Wang, “Effects of the interaction be- tween dark energy and dark matter on cosmological pa- rameters,”JCAP, vol. 06, p. 010, 2008

    work page 2008

  51. [51]

    On the large- scale instability in interacting dark energy and dark matter fluids,

    B. M. Jackson, A. Taylor, and A. Berera, “On the large- scale instability in interacting dark energy and dark matter fluids,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 79, p. 043526, 2009

    work page 2009

  52. [52]

    Cosmological evolution with interac- tion between dark energy and dark matter,

    Y. L. Bolotin, A. Kostenko, O. A. Lemets, and D. A. Yerokhin, “Cosmological evolution with interac- tion between dark energy and dark matter,”Interna- tional Journal of Modern Physics D, vol. 24, no. 03, p. 1530007, 2015

    work page 2015

  53. [53]

    Dark matter and dark energy interac- tions: Theoretical challenges, cosmological implications and observational signatures,

    B. Wang, E. Abdalla, F. Atrio-Barandela, and D. Pav´ on, “Dark matter and dark energy interac- tions: Theoretical challenges, cosmological implications and observational signatures,”Reports on Progress in Physics, vol. 79, no. 9, p. 096901, 2016

    work page 2016

  54. [54]

    Can in- teracting dark energy solve theH0 tension?,

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, and O. Mena, “Can in- teracting dark energy solve theH0 tension?,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 96, no. 4, p. 043503, 2017

    work page 2017

  55. [55]

    Interacting dark energy with time varying equation of state and theH 0 tension,

    W. Yang, A. Mukherjee, E. Di Valentino, and S. Pan, “Interacting dark energy with time varying equation of state and theH 0 tension,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 98, no. 12, p. 123527, 2018

    work page 2018

  56. [56]

    Tale of stable interact- ing dark energy, observational signatures, and theH 0 tension,

    W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, R. C. Nunes, S. Vagnozzi, and D. F. Mota, “Tale of stable interact- ing dark energy, observational signatures, and theH 0 tension,”JCAP, vol. 09, p. 019, 2018

    work page 2018

  57. [57]

    Interacting scenarios with dynamical dark energy: Observational constraints and alleviation of theH 0 tension,

    S. Pan, W. Yang, E. Di Valentino, E. N. Saridakis, and S. Chakraborty, “Interacting scenarios with dynamical dark energy: Observational constraints and alleviation of theH 0 tension,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 100, no. 10, p. 103520, 2019

    work page 2019

  58. [58]

    Interacting dark energy in the early 2020s: A promising solution to theH 0 and cosmic shear ten- sions,

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri, O. Mena, and S. Vagnozzi, “Interacting dark energy in the early 2020s: A promising solution to theH 0 and cosmic shear ten- sions,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 30, p. 100666, 2020

    work page 2020

  59. [59]

    Further understanding the interaction be- tween dark energy and dark matter: current status and future directions,

    B. Wang, E. Abdalla, F. Atrio-Barandela, and D. Pav´ on, “Further understanding the interaction be- tween dark energy and dark matter: current status and future directions,”Rept. Prog. Phys., vol. 87, no. 3, p. 036901, 2024

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    I. Linear interacting dark energy: Analytical solutions and theoretical pathologies,

    M. van der Westhuizen, A. Abebe, and E. Di Valentino, “I. Linear interacting dark energy: Analytical solutions and theoretical pathologies,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 50, p. 102119, 2025

    work page 2025

  61. [61]

    Dark coupling,

    M. B. Gavela, D. Hernandez, L. Lopez Honorez, O. Mena, and S. Rigolin, “Dark coupling,”JCAP, vol. 07, p. 034, 2009. [Erratum: JCAP 05, E01 (2010)]

    work page 2009

  62. [62]

    Testing the Interaction between Dark Energy and Dark Matter with Planck Data,

    A. A. Costa, X.-D. Xu, B. Wang, E. G. M. Ferreira, and E. Abdalla, “Testing the Interaction between Dark Energy and Dark Matter with Planck Data,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 89, no. 10, p. 103531, 2014

    work page 2014

  63. [63]

    An an- alytic model for interacting dark energy and its ob- servational constraints,

    S. Pan, S. Bhattacharya, and S. Chakraborty, “An an- alytic model for interacting dark energy and its ob- servational constraints,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc., vol. 452, no. 3, pp. 3038–3046, 2015

    work page 2015

  64. [64]

    II. Non-linear interacting dark energy: Analytical so- lutions and theoretical pathologies,

    M. van der Westhuizen, A. Abebe, and E. Di Valentino, “II. Non-linear interacting dark energy: Analytical so- lutions and theoretical pathologies,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 50, p. 102120, 2025

    work page 2025

  65. [65]

    III. Interacting Dark Energy: Summary of mod- els, Pathologies, and Constraints,

    M. van der Westhuizen, A. Abebe, and E. Di Valentino, “III. Interacting Dark Energy: Summary of mod- els, Pathologies, and Constraints,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 50, p. 102121, 2025

    work page 2025

  66. [66]

    Interacting Dark Energy – constraints and degeneracies,

    T. Clemson, K. Koyama, G.-B. Zhao, R. Maartens, and J. Valiviita, “Interacting Dark Energy – constraints and degeneracies,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 85, p. 043007, 2012

    work page 2012

  67. [67]

    Parametrized Post-Friedmann Framework for Interacting Dark En- ergy,

    Y.-H. Li, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, “Parametrized Post-Friedmann Framework for Interacting Dark En- ergy,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 90, no. 6, p. 063005, 2014

    work page 2014

  68. [68]

    Interacting dark energy: clarifying the cosmological implications and viability conditions,

    M. A. van der Westhuizen and A. Abebe, “Interacting dark energy: clarifying the cosmological implications and viability conditions,”JCAP, vol. 01, p. 048, 2024

    work page 2024

  69. [69]

    Constraints on interacting dark energy revisited: Implications for the Hubble tension,

    G. A. Hoerning, R. G. Landim, L. O. Ponte, R. P. Rolim, F. B. Abdalla, and E. Abdalla, “Constraints on interacting dark energy revisited: Implications for the Hubble tension,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 112, no. 2, p. 023523, 2025

    work page 2025

  70. [70]

    Interacting Dark Energy after DESI Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Measurements,

    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., vol. 133, no. 25, p. 251003, 2024

    work page 2024

  71. [71]

    Late-time constraints on interacting dark energy: Analysis independent of H0, rd, and MB,

    D. Benisty, S. Pan, D. Staicova, E. Di Valentino, and R. C. Nunes, “Late-time constraints on interacting dark energy: Analysis independent of H0, rd, and MB,”As- tron. Astrophys., vol. 688, p. A156, 2024

    work page 2024

  72. [72]

    Redshift-space distortions corner interacting dark energy,

    P. Ghedini, R. Hajjar, and O. Mena, “Redshift-space distortions corner interacting dark energy,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 46, p. 101671, 2024

    work page 2024

  73. [73]

    Cosmo- logical constraints on the phenomenological interacting dark energy model with Fermi gamma-ray bursts and DESI DR2,

    Z. Zhu, Q. Jiang, Y. Liu, P. Wu, and N. Liang, “Cosmo- logical constraints on the phenomenological interacting dark energy model with Fermi gamma-ray bursts and DESI DR2,”JHEAp, vol. 51, p. 100534, 2026. 18

    work page 2026

  74. [74]

    Evolving and interacting dark energy: photometric and spectroscopic synergy with DES Y3 and DESI DR2,

    M. Tsedrik and B. Bose, “Evolving and interacting dark energy: photometric and spectroscopic synergy with DES Y3 and DESI DR2,” 12 2025

    work page 2025

  75. [75]

    Dark degen- eracy in DESI DR2 data: Interacting or evolving dark energy?,

    V. Petri, V. Marra, and R. von Marttens, “Dark degen- eracy in DESI DR2 data: Interacting or evolving dark energy?,”Phys. Rev. D, vol. 113, no. 2, p. 023504, 2026

    work page 2026

  76. [76]

    Late-time background constraints on linear and non-linear interacting dark energy after DESI DR2,

    D. Figueruelo, M. van der Westhuizen, A. Abebe, and E. Di Valentino, “Late-time background constraints on linear and non-linear interacting dark energy after DESI DR2,”Phys. Dark Univ., vol. 52, p. 102238, 2026

    work page 2026

  77. [77]

    Strong Evidence for Dark Sector Interactions,

    T.-N. Li, W. Giar` e, G.-H. Du, Y.-H. Li, E. Di Valentino, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, “Strong Evidence for Dark Sector Interactions,” 1 2026

    work page 2026

  78. [78]

    Breaking parameter degen- eracy in interacting dark energy models from observa- tions,

    X.-D. Xu and B. Wang, “Breaking parameter degen- eracy in interacting dark energy models from observa- tions,”Phys. Lett. B, vol. 701, pp. 513–519, 2011

    work page 2011

  79. [79]

    On dark degeneracy and interacting models,

    S. Carneiro and H. A. Borges, “On dark degeneracy and interacting models,”JCAP, vol. 06, p. 010, 2014

    work page 2014

  80. [80]

    Schmidt and S

    F. Schmidt and S. Dodelson,Modern cosmology. Lon- don: Academic Press., 2021

    work page 2021

Showing first 80 references.