pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.28013 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-30 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Recognition: unknown

Cosmological intercept tension

Jia-Qi Wang , Shao-Jiang Wang
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 05:54 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords type Ia supernovaeHubble constantdark energyluminosity distancecosmological interceptlate-time physicssystematicsinteracting dark energy
0
0 comments X

The pith

The intercept a_B computed from supernova magnitudes serves as a diagnostic for distinguishing local systematics from late-time new physics in cosmological models.

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

The paper shows how to calculate the intercept a_B directly from observed supernova apparent magnitudes and redshifts once a model for the luminosity distance is assumed. This value combines information about the absolute magnitude and the Hubble constant, allowing consistency checks without resolving their degeneracy. If a_B stays constant across different datasets and redshift ranges, it supports the model; variations at low redshifts may point to measurement issues in nearby objects, while those at higher redshifts could signal evolving dark energy or other late-time physics. The authors identify such variations in two supernova samples, with removal of the low-redshift variation yielding a Hubble constant consistent with other local determinations and removal of the intermediate-redshift variation diminishing support for dynamical dark energy.

Core claim

The central claim is that the constancy of the intercept a_B across supernova datasets and redshift bins for a given late-time luminosity distance model provides a diagnostic to separate late-time new physics from local supernova systematics. Application to one dataset reveals a tension near redshift 0.01, and removing low-redshift data to eliminate it produces a Hubble constant measurement aligned with typical local determinations using both three-rung and two-rung methods. In another dataset, a tension near redshift 0.1 is found, and its elimination reduces the preference for dynamical dark energy; this tension arises from discrepancies between the supernova data and combined constraints,

What carries the argument

The intercept a_B in the magnitude-luminosity distance relation m_B = 5 lg d_L(z) - 5 a_B, which equals the combination of absolute magnitude and Hubble constant term and can be computed from observations alone for a fixed d_L model.

If this is right

  • Removal of the low-redshift tension aligns the Hubble constant inference with other local measurements using both three-rung and two-rung approaches.
  • Removal of the intermediate-redshift tension substantially lowers the statistical preference for dynamical dark energy.
  • The intermediate-redshift tension is mainly due to inconsistencies between the supernova observations and constraints from other cosmological data.
  • Dynamical dark energy acts as a compromise solution to these inter-data tensions.
  • Interacting dark energy models offer a way to reconcile the supernova data with other cosmological constraints.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This diagnostic method could be extended to future supernova surveys to probe for similar redshift-dependent variations.
  • Persistent tensions would motivate development of models that modify the expansion history in specific redshift intervals.
  • Careful examination of binning choices and error modeling is needed to confirm that variations are not artifacts.
  • Linking this to other probes like baryon acoustic oscillations may test the consistency of proposed interacting dark energy scenarios.

Load-bearing premise

That any variation found in the intercept a_B must reflect either local systematics or new physics, as opposed to statistical fluctuations, incomplete modeling of the luminosity distance, or effects from how the data are selected and binned.

What would settle it

Computing the intercept a_B in multiple narrow redshift bins for the intermediate-redshift supernova sample and finding it consistent with a single constant value within uncertainties would falsify the claim of a late-time tension.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.28013 by Jia-Qi Wang, Shao-Jiang Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Local versus Hubble-flow supernova intercept constraints from Ref. [34]. The upper panels illustrate the displacement between the local-SN and Hubble-flow/IDL constraints in the 𝐻0–𝑀𝐵 plane and in the corresponding 𝑎𝐵 posterior. Although 𝐻0 and 𝑀𝐵 are individually consistent within uncertainties, the contours are separated along the diagonal intercept direction. The lower panel visualizes the same discrepa… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Second-rung versus third-rung consistency test from Ref. [35]. The first panel shows that the Cepheid-hosted local SNe, which calibrate 𝑀𝐵 in the second rung, are responsible for the dominant local displacement in 𝑎𝐵, while the non-Cepheid local SNe remain consistent with the third-rung Hubble￾flow intercept. The second panel shows the 𝑎𝐵 Gaussian posteriors for late-time and local CSP SNe Ia calibrated by… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The late-time 𝑎𝐵 diagnosis for DES-Y5 compared with PantheonPlus from Ref. [36]. In the first panel, the DES-SN subset has a stable intercept compatible with a single magnitude–distance relation just like the PantheonPlus sample, while the external low-𝑧 subset shows large fluctuations and a mean offset of about 0.043 mag. relative to DES-SN. This cannot be cured simply by turning into another model withou… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Re-analysis for the late-time 𝑎𝐵 tension with previous DESY5 (top) and updated DES-Dovekie (bottom) [68, 90] compared to PantheonPlus, all of which are split into low-𝑧 and high-𝑧 parts around 𝑧 ∼ 0.1. When computing 𝑎𝐵 from a specific 𝑑𝐿 (𝑧), ΛCDM and 𝑤0𝑤𝑎CDM models are used in the left and right columns, respectively, where the parameter choices of corresponding models are as follows for both panels: the… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison between dynamical and interacting dark-energy interpretations from Ref. [71]. In the CPL 𝑤0𝑤𝑎CDM model, the separate Planck, DESI, and DES-Y5 constraints on Ωm remain widely dispersed, even though the combined fit improves over ΛCDM. In the nonminimally coupled quintessence model, the dark-sector interaction modifies the effective dark-matter evolution and brings the individual Ωm constraints in… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Full redshift evolution of the physical and reconstructed dark-sector components from Ref. [71]. The effective dark energy 𝜌 eff DE remains nonphantom, while the apparent dark energy 𝜌 app DE inferred by matching the NMCQ model to a CPL decomposition can cross 𝑤 = −1 around 𝑧 ≃ 0.5. At higher redshift, the apparent density may become negative and its equation of state may diverge, but this is only a decomp… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The long-standing tension in the Hubble constant $H_0$ has motivated extensive explorations of both new physics and observational systematics, for example, the late-time systematics in measuring the B-band absolute magnitude $M_B$ of type Ia supernovae, which is degenerated with $H_0$ via an intercept $-5a_B=M_B+5\lg (c/H_0/\mathrm{Mpc})+25$ in the linear relation $m_B=5\lg d_L(z)-5a_B$ between the apparent magnitude $m_B$ and logarithmic dimensionless luminosity distance $\lg d_L(z)$. Therefore, this intercept can be evaluated directly from pure observational quantities ($m_B$ and the redshift $z$) for a given model of $d_L(z)$ without knowing underlying systematics in $M_B$-$H_0$ degeneracy. Hence, the constancy of this intercept across different supernova datasets and different redshift bins within the same dataset for a given late-time model serves as a powerful diagnostic for disentangling late-time new physics from local supernova systematics. In this mini-review, we will show that: (1) there is a local $a_B$ tension in PantheonPlus around $z\sim0.01$, and the elimination of it leads to a $H_0$ measurement consistent with both SH0ES typical three-rung and first two-rung measurements; (2) there is a late-time $a_B$ tension in DES-Y5 around $z\sim0.1$, and the elimination of it largely reduces the preference for dynamical dark energy. We also update the late-time $a_B$-tension analysis for both DES-Y5 and DES-Dovekie supernovae, and find that this $a_B$ tension around $z\sim0.1$ is mainly driven by the inter-data tension between DES supernovae and DESI+Planck constraint, and the dynamical dark energy is preferred as a compromise of this tension. Finally, we briefly mention an interacting dark energy model that resolves this tension among DES, DESI, and Planck, and point out a crucial difference between the effective and apparent equations of state of dark energy.

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

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes the constancy of the supernova intercept a_B = (5 lg d_L(z) - m_B)/5, evaluated for a fixed late-time luminosity-distance model d_L(z), as a diagnostic to distinguish late-time new physics from local systematics in Type Ia supernovae. It reports a local a_B tension in PantheonPlus near z ∼ 0.01 whose removal produces an H0 value consistent with both the standard three-rung and first two-rung SH0ES measurements, and a late-time a_B tension in DES-Y5 near z ∼ 0.1 whose removal substantially reduces the statistical preference for dynamical dark energy. Updated results for DES-Y5 and DES-Dovekie are presented, with the latter tension attributed primarily to inter-dataset inconsistency between DES supernovae and the DESI+Planck combination; an interacting dark-energy model is briefly invoked as a possible resolution that distinguishes effective from apparent equations of state.

Significance. If the reported non-constancies survive rigorous statistical validation, the a_B diagnostic could offer a practical, model-independent way to localize the source of the Hubble tension and of apparent dynamical-dark-energy signals. The approach usefully separates the intercept from the M_B–H0 degeneracy and draws attention to possible inter-dataset tensions rather than requiring new physics at every step. Credit is due for the explicit linkage between a_B constancy and the ability to recover SH0ES-like H0 values and for the qualitative discussion of an interacting dark-energy scenario.

major comments (3)
  1. [PantheonPlus local a_B tension analysis] In the PantheonPlus local-tension section, the identification of a_B variation near z ∼ 0.01 and the subsequent elimination of discrepant points to recover H0 consistency with SH0ES lacks any description of the precise statistical threshold, bin-boundary sensitivity tests, or multiple-comparison correction applied. Without these, it is impossible to judge whether the apparent tension exceeds the expectation from statistical fluctuations and magnitude-redshift covariances under a constant-a_B null hypothesis.
  2. [DES-Y5 late-time a_B tension analysis] In the DES-Y5 late-time tension section, the statement that elimination of the z ∼ 0.1 a_B tension “largely reduces the preference for dynamical dark energy” is not accompanied by quantitative measures (Δχ², Bayes factor, or posterior odds) before versus after removal. Because d_L(z) is anchored to external (Planck) constraints, the observed variation may partly reflect the joint dataset tension rather than an intrinsic supernova effect; a decomposition isolating the supernova contribution is required to support the diagnostic claim.
  3. [Updated DES-Y5/DES-Dovekie analysis] In the updated DES-Dovekie and inter-data tension discussion, the attribution of the a_B discrepancy primarily to tension between DES supernovae and DESI+Planck is presented without tabulated a_B values per redshift bin or per survey, nor with the associated covariance matrices. This prevents independent assessment of the size of the discrepancy relative to the reported uncertainties and weakens the claim that the tension is “mainly driven” by inter-data inconsistency.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Introduction] The relation −5a_B = M_B + 5 lg(c/H0/Mpc) + 25 is stated in the abstract but not written as an explicit numbered equation in the introduction; adding Eq. (1) would improve traceability.
  2. [Interacting dark energy model] The brief discussion of the interacting dark-energy model would benefit from a short derivation or reference showing how the effective and apparent equations of state differ, rather than a qualitative remark only.
  3. [Figures] Figure captions (where a_B is plotted versus z) should explicitly state the assumed d_L(z) model, the number of supernovae per bin, and the 1σ error bars used.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive major comments, which highlight areas where additional detail will improve clarity and allow readers to better evaluate the statistical robustness of the a_B diagnostic. We respond to each point below and will incorporate revisions to address the concerns raised.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: In the PantheonPlus local-tension section, the identification of a_B variation near z ∼ 0.01 and the subsequent elimination of discrepant points to recover H0 consistency with SH0ES lacks any description of the precise statistical threshold, bin-boundary sensitivity tests, or multiple-comparison correction applied. Without these, it is impossible to judge whether the apparent tension exceeds the expectation from statistical fluctuations and magnitude-redshift covariances under a constant-a_B null hypothesis.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The binning in the PantheonPlus analysis was chosen to align with the redshift scale of local distance-ladder calibrators, and points were flagged as discrepant when they deviated noticeably from the mean a_B across the sample. No formal multiple-comparison correction was applied because the bin boundaries were fixed by physical considerations rather than data-driven optimization. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit description of the threshold criterion employed, report the results of sensitivity tests in which bin boundaries are shifted by small amounts, and include a short discussion of how magnitude-redshift covariances enter the a_B error budget. These additions will enable a clearer assessment of whether the observed variation exceeds expectations under the constant-a_B null hypothesis. revision: yes

  2. Referee: In the DES-Y5 late-time tension section, the statement that elimination of the z ∼ 0.1 a_B tension “largely reduces the preference for dynamical dark energy” is not accompanied by quantitative measures (Δχ², Bayes factor, or posterior odds) before versus after removal. Because d_L(z) is anchored to external (Planck) constraints, the observed variation may partly reflect the joint dataset tension rather than an intrinsic supernova effect; a decomposition isolating the supernova contribution is required to support the diagnostic claim.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative metrics and an explicit decomposition are needed to substantiate the claim. Because the luminosity-distance model is held fixed at the Planck best-fit values, any shift in a_B directly measures the inconsistency between the supernova magnitudes and that model; the external prior contributes a constant term to the total χ². In the revised version we will report Δχ² (and, where feasible, Bayes-factor estimates) for the w0waCDM versus ΛCDM fits before and after removal of the z ∼ 0.1 bin, together with a short paragraph that isolates the supernova-only χ² contribution. This decomposition will clarify that the reduction in dynamical-dark-energy preference is driven by the supernova data rather than by the joint tension alone. revision: yes

  3. Referee: In the updated DES-Dovekie and inter-data tension discussion, the attribution of the a_B discrepancy primarily to tension between DES supernovae and DESI+Planck is presented without tabulated a_B values per redshift bin or per survey, nor with the associated covariance matrices. This prevents independent assessment of the size of the discrepancy relative to the reported uncertainties and weakens the claim that the tension is “mainly driven” by inter-data inconsistency.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the absence of tabulated values limits independent verification. As the manuscript is a concise mini-review, we focused on the narrative interpretation; however, we will add a compact table listing the measured a_B and its uncertainty for each relevant redshift bin in both DES-Y5 and DES-Dovekie, together with the value expected from the DESI+Planck combination. For the covariance matrices we will describe their structure, quote the diagonal uncertainties used in the analysis, and note that the full matrices are publicly available from the supernova data releases. These additions will allow readers to confirm that the largest residuals occur when DES supernovae are combined with DESI+Planck, thereby supporting the inter-dataset origin of the tension. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the a_B constancy diagnostic

full rationale

The paper defines a_B explicitly via the algebraic rearrangement a_B = (5 lg d_L(z) - m_B)/5 from the observed supernova magnitudes m_B and redshifts z, using a fixed external late-time d_L(z) model (e.g., anchored to Planck+DESI constraints independent of the supernova samples under test). It then empirically evaluates whether this computed a_B remains constant across datasets and redshift bins. This evaluation is a direct data comparison and does not reduce any reported tension, H0 consistency after point elimination, or diagnostic power to a tautology, self-fit, or self-citation chain; the variations are presented as observed discrepancies rather than predictions forced by the inputs. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks, with no load-bearing step that collapses by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

With only the abstract available, the ledger is inferred from the described method. The central claim rests on standard late-time cosmological assumptions for luminosity distance and the premise that intercept constancy diagnoses systematics versus new physics. No new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the summary provided.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The luminosity distance d_L(z) follows a specific late-time cosmological model (e.g., LambdaCDM or wCDM) that is fixed independently of the supernova data under test.
    The abstract states the intercept is evaluated 'for a given model of d_L(z)' to serve as a diagnostic.
  • domain assumption The intercept a_B must be constant across redshift bins and datasets under a correct late-time model unless systematics or new physics are present.
    This constancy is presented as the core test for disentangling systematics from new physics.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5698 in / 1858 out tokens · 85935 ms · 2026-05-07T05:54:12.507946+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

84 extracted references · 84 canonical work pages · 12 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Moresco et al

    M. Moresco et al.,Unveiling the Universe with emerging cosmological probes,Living Rev. Rel.25(2022) 6, [2201.07241]

    work page arXiv 2022

  2. [2]

    Perivolaropoulos and F

    L. Perivolaropoulos and F. Skara,Challenges forΛCDM: An update,New Astron. Rev.95 (2022) 101659, [2105.05208]

    work page arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    J. L. Bernal, L. Verde and A. G. Riess,The trouble with𝐻0,JCAP1610(2016) 019, [1607.05617]. 20 Cosmological intercept tension

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    Tensions between the Early and the Late Universe

    L. Verde, T. Treu and A. G. Riess,Tensions between the Early and the Late Universe, Nature Astron.3(7, 2019) 891, [1907.10625]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2019

  5. [5]

    Knox and M

    L. Knox and M. Millea,Hubble constant hunter’s guide,Phys. Rev.D101(2020) 043533, [1908.03663]

    work page arXiv 2020

  6. [6]

    A. G. Riess,The Expansion of the Universe is Faster than Expected,Nature Rev. Phys.2 (2019) 10–12, [2001.03624]

    work page arXiv 2019

  7. [7]

    W. L. Freedman,Measurements of the Hubble Constant: Tensions in Perspective, Astrophys. J.919(2021) 16, [2106.15656]

    work page arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    A. G. Riess et al.,A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km/s/Mpc Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team,Astrophys. J. Lett.934(2022) L7, [2112.04510]. [10]Planckcollaboration, N. Aghanim et al.,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6, [1807.06209]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2022

  9. [9]

    Di Valentino et al

    E. Di Valentino et al.,Snowmass2021 - Letter of interest cosmology intertwined II: The hubble constant tension,Astropart. Phys.131(2021) 102605, [2008.11284]

    work page arXiv 2021

  10. [10]

    In the Realm of the Hubble tension $-$ a Review of Solutions

    E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Melchiorri et al.,In the realm of the Hubble tension—a review of solutions,Class. Quant. Grav.38(2021) 153001, [2103.01183]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2021

  11. [11]

    Sch¨ oneberg, G

    N. Schöneberg, G. Franco Abellán, A. Pérez Sánchez, S. J. Witte, V. Poulin and J. Lesgourgues,The H0 Olympics: A fair ranking of proposed models,Phys. Rept.984 (2022) 1–55, [2107.10291]

    work page arXiv 2022

  12. [12]

    P. Shah, P. Lemos and O. Lahav,A buyer’s guide to the Hubble constant,Astron. Astrophys. Rev.29(2021) 9, [2109.01161]

    work page arXiv 2021

  13. [13]

    E. Abdalla et al.,Cosmology intertwined: A review of the particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies,JHEAp34(2022) 49–211, [2203.06142]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2022

  14. [14]

    Hu and F.-Y

    J.-P. Hu and F.-Y. Wang,Hubble Tension: The Evidence of New Physics,Universe9(2023) 94, [2302.05709]

    work page arXiv 2023

  15. [15]

    Vagnozzi, Universe 9, 393 (2023), arXiv:2308.16628 [astro- ph.CO]

    S. Vagnozzi,Seven Hints That Early-Time New Physics Alone Is Not Sufficient to Solve the Hubble Tension,Universe9(2023) 393, [2308.16628]

    work page arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    R.-G. Cai, L. Li and S.-J. Wang,Hubble-constant crisis,Acta Phys. Sin.72(2023) 239801. [19]CosmoVerse Networkcollaboration, E. Di Valentino et al.,The CosmoVerse White Paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics,Phys. Dark Univ.49(2025) 101965, [2504.01669]. 21 Cosmological intercept tension

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    Krishnan, E

    C. Krishnan, E. O. Colgáin, Ruchika, A. A. Sen, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari and T. Yang,Is there an early Universe solution to Hubble tension?,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 103525, [2002.06044]

    work page arXiv 2020

  18. [18]

    Jedamzik, L

    K. Jedamzik, L. Pogosian and G.-B. Zhao,Why reducing the cosmic sound horizon alone can not fully resolve the Hubble tension,Commun. in Phys.4(2021) 123, [2010.04158]

    work page arXiv 2021

  19. [19]

    J. C. Hill, E. McDonough, M. W. Toomey and S. Alexander,Early dark energy does not restore cosmological concordance,Phys. Rev.D102(2020) 043507, [2003.07355]

    work page arXiv 2020

  20. [20]

    W. Lin, X. Chen and K. J. Mack,Early Universe Physics Insensitive and Uncalibrated Cosmic Standards: Constraints onΩm and Implications for the Hubble Tension,Astrophys. J.920(2021) 159, [2102.05701]

    work page arXiv 2021

  21. [21]

    Vagnozzi, Phys

    S. Vagnozzi,Consistency tests ofΛCDM from the early integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect: Implications for early-time new physics and the Hubble tension,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 063524, [2105.10425]

    work page arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    O. H. E. Philcox, G. S. Farren, B. D. Sherwin, E. J. Baxter and D. J. Brout,Determining the Hubble constant without the sound horizon: A 3.6% constraint on H0 from galaxy surveys, CMB lensing, and supernovae,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 063530, [2204.02984]

    work page arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    Benevento, W

    G. Benevento, W. Hu and M. Raveri,Can Late Dark Energy Transitions Raise the Hubble constant?,Phys. Rev.D101(2020) 103517, [2002.11707]

    work page arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    Camarena and V

    D. Camarena and V. Marra,On the use of the local prior on the absolute magnitude of Type Ia supernovae in cosmological inference,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.504(2021) 5164–5171, [2101.08641]

    work page arXiv 2021

  25. [25]

    Efstathiou,To H0 or not to H0?,Mon

    G. Efstathiou,To H0 or not to H0?,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.505(2021) 3866–3872, [2103.08723]

    work page arXiv 2021

  26. [26]

    Cai, Z.-K

    R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo, L. Li, S.-J. Wang and W.-W. Yu,Chameleon dark energy can resolve the Hubble tension,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) L121302, [2102.02020]

    work page arXiv 2021

  27. [27]

    Cai, Z.-K

    R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo, S.-J. Wang, W.-W. Yu and Y. Zhou,No-go guide for the Hubble tension: Late-time solutions,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) L021301, [2107.13286]

    work page arXiv 2022

  28. [28]

    Cai, Z.-K

    R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo, S.-J. Wang, W.-W. Yu and Y. Zhou,No-go guide for late-time solutions to the Hubble tension: Matter perturbations,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 063519, [2202.12214]

    work page arXiv 2022

  29. [29]

    Calzà, M

    M. Calzà, M. Rinaldi and S. Vagnozzi,Importance of being nonminimally coupled: Scalar Hawking radiation from regular black holes,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 104055, [2510.12257]

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    W.-W. Yu, L. Li and S.-J. Wang,First detection of the Hubble variation correlation and its scale dependence,2209.14732. 22 Cosmological intercept tension

    work page arXiv

  31. [31]

    Huang, S.-J

    L. Huang, S.-J. Wang and W.-W. Yu,No-go guide for the Hubble tension: Late-time or local-scale new physics,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68(2025) 220413, [2401.14170]

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Huang, R.-G

    L. Huang, R.-G. Cai, S.-J. Wang, J.-Q. Liu and Y.-H. Yao,Narrowing down the Hubble tension to the first two rungs of distance ladders,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68(2025) 280405, [2410.06053]

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Huang, R.-G

    L. Huang, R.-G. Cai and S.-J. Wang,The DESI DR1/DR2 evidence for dynamical dark energy is biased by low-redshift supernovae,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.(2, 2025) , [2502.04212]

    work page arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    G. Ye, B. Hu and Y.-S. Piao,Implication of the Hubble tension for the primordial Universe in light of recent cosmological data,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 063510, [2103.09729]

    work page arXiv 2021

  35. [35]

    Fu and S.-J

    C. Fu and S.-J. Wang,Reconciling early dark energy with a Harrison-Zeldovich spectrum, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) L041304, [2310.12932]

    work page arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    C. Fu, D. Lu and S.-J. Wang,Harrison-Zeldovich attractor: From Planck to ACT results, Phys. Rev. D113(2026) L081304, [2510.24682]. [40]Atacama Cosmology Telescopecollaboration, T. Louis et al.,The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 power spectra, likelihoods andΛCDM parameters,JCAP11(2025) 062, [2503.14452]. [41]Atacama Cosmology Telescopecollaboration, E. ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    A. H. Wright et al.,KiDS-Legacy: Cosmological constraints from cosmic shear with the complete Kilo-Degree Survey,Astron. Astrophys.703(2025) A158, [2503.19441]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Poulin, T

    V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, R. Calderón and T. Simon,Impact of ACT DR6 and DESI DR2 for early dark energy and the Hubble tension,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 063519, [2505.08051]. [44]SPT-3Gcollaboration, A. R. Khalife et al.,SPT-3G D1: Axion Early Dark Energy with CMB experiments and DESI,2507.23355

    work page arXiv 2026

  39. [39]

    Toda and O

    Y. Toda and O. Seto,Constraints on the varying electron mass and early dark energy in light of ACT DR6 and DESI DR2 and the implications for inflation,JCAP02(2026) 019, [2508.09025]

    work page arXiv 2026

  40. [40]

    Wang and Y.-S

    H. Wang and Y.-S. Piao,Dark energy after pre-recombination early dark energy in light of DESI DR2 and the latest ACT and SPT data,2511.16606

    work page arXiv

  41. [41]

    Yin, G.-H

    L. Yin, G.-H. Du, T.-N. Li and X. Zhang,Joint constraints on cosmic birefringence and early dark energy from ACT, Planck, DESI, and PantheonPlus,2601.13624. 23 Cosmological intercept tension

    work page arXiv

  42. [42]

    A. J. Cuesta, L. Verde, A. Riess and R. Jimenez,Calibrating the cosmic distance scale ladder: the role of the sound horizon scale and the local expansion rate as distance anchors,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.448(2015) 3463–3471, [1411.1094]

    work page arXiv 2015

  43. [43]

    Heavens, R

    A. Heavens, R. Jimenez and L. Verde,Standard rulers, candles, and clocks from the low-redshift Universe,Phys. Rev. Lett.113(2014) 241302, [1409.6217]

    work page arXiv 2014

  44. [44]

    Cosmological implications of baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) measurements

    E. Aubourg et al.,Cosmological implications of baryon acoustic oscillation measurements, Phys. Rev.D92(2015) 123516, [1411.1074]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  45. [45]

    Verde, J

    L. Verde, J. L. Bernal, A. F. Heavens and R. Jimenez,The length of the low-redshift standard ruler,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.467(2017) 731–736, [1607.05297]. [52]BOSScollaboration, S. Alam et al.,The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: cosmological analysis of the DR12 galaxy sample,Mon. Not. Roy. Ast...

    work page arXiv 2017

  46. [46]

    Verde, E

    L. Verde, E. Bellini, C. Pigozzo, A. F. Heavens and R. Jimenez,Early Cosmology Constrained,JCAP1704(2017) 023, [1611.00376]. [54]DEScollaboration, E. Macaulay et al.,First Cosmological Results using Type Ia Supernovae from the Dark Energy Survey: Measurement of the Hubble Constant,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.486(2019) 2184–2196, [1811.02376]

    work page arXiv 2017

  47. [47]

    S. M. Feeney, H. V. Peiris, A. R. Williamson, S. M. Nissanke, D. J. Mortlock, J. Alsing et al.,Prospects for resolving the Hubble constant tension with standard sirens,Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019) 061105, [1802.03404]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

  48. [48]

    Lemos, E

    P. Lemos, E. Lee, G. Efstathiou and S. Gratton,Model independent𝐻(𝑧)reconstruction using the cosmic inverse distance ladder,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.483(2019) 4803–4810, [1806.06781]. [57]eBOSScollaboration, S. Alam et al.,Completed SDSS-IV extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: Cosmological implications from two decades of spectroscopic surv...

    work page arXiv 2019

  49. [49]

    Ling, G.-H

    J.-L. Ling, G.-H. Du, T.-N. Li, J.-F. Zhang, S.-J. Wang and X. Zhang,Model-independent cosmological inference after the DESI DR2 data with improved inverse distance ladder, Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 083528, [2505.22369]

    work page arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmological Constraints

    D. Brout et al.,The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmological Constraints,Astrophys. J.938 (2022) 110, [2202.04077]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2022

  51. [51]

    The Pantheon+ Analysis: The Full Dataset and Light-Curve Release

    D. Scolnic et al.,The Pantheon+ Analysis: The Full Data Set and Light-curve Release, Astrophys. J.938(2022) 113, [2112.03863]

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2022

  52. [52]

    2021, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2112.03864

    D. Brout et al.,The Pantheon+ Analysis: SuperCal-fragilistic Cross Calibration, Retrained SALT2 Light-curve Model, and Calibration Systematic Uncertainty,Astrophys. J.938 (2022) 111, [2112.03864]. 24 Cosmological intercept tension

    work page arXiv 2022

  53. [53]

    E. R. Peterson et al.,The Pantheon+ Analysis: Evaluating Peculiar Velocity Corrections in Cosmological Analyses with Nearby Type Ia Supernovae,Astrophys. J.938(2022) 112, [2110.03487]

    work page arXiv 2022

  54. [54]

    A. Carr, T. M. Davis, D. Scolnic, D. Scolnic, K. Said, D. Brout et al.,The Pantheon+ analysis: Improving the redshifts and peculiar velocities of Type Ia supernovae used in cosmological analyses,Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral.39(2022) e046, [2112.01471]

    work page arXiv 2022

  55. [55]

    Popovic, D

    B. Popovic, D. Brout, R. Kessler and D. Scolnic,The Pantheon+ Analysis: Forward Modeling the Dust and Intrinsic Color Distributions of Type Ia Supernovae, and Quantifying Their Impact on Cosmological Inferences,Astrophys. J.945(2023) 84, [2112.04456]. [65]DEScollaboration, T. M. C. Abbott et al.,The Dark Energy Survey: Cosmology Results with∼1500 New High...

    work page arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    Resolving the Planck-DESI tension by nonminimally coupled quintessence

    J.-Q. Wang, R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo and S.-J. Wang,Resolving the Planck-DESI tension by nonminimally coupled quintessence,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 083534, [2508.01759]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  57. [57]

    Huang,Supernova Magnitude Evolution and PAge Approximation,Astrophys

    Z. Huang,Supernova Magnitude Evolution and PAge Approximation,Astrophys. J. Lett. 892(2020) L28, [2001.06926]

    work page arXiv 2020

  58. [58]

    X. Luo, Z. Huang, Q. Qian and L. Huang,Reaffirming the Cosmic Acceleration without Supernovae and the Cosmic Microwave Background,Astrophys. J.905(2020) 53, [2008.00487]

    work page arXiv 2020

  59. [59]

    Huang, Z

    L. Huang, Z. Huang, X. Luo, X. He and Y. Fang,Reconciling low and high redshift GRB luminosity correlations,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 123521, [2012.02474]. 25 Cosmological intercept tension

    work page arXiv 2021

  60. [60]

    Huang, Z.-Q

    L. Huang, Z.-Q. Huang, Z. Huang, Z.-Y. Li, Z. Li and H. Zhou,A more accurate Parameterization based on cosmic Age (MAPAge),Res. Astron. Astrophys.21(2021) 277, [2108.03959]

    work page arXiv 2021

  61. [61]

    Huang, Z

    L. Huang, Z. Huang, H. Zhou and Z. Li,The S8 tension in light of updated redshift-space distortion data and PAge approximation,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.65(2022) 239512, [2110.08498]

    work page arXiv 2022

  62. [62]

    Huang,Thawing k-essence dark energy in the PAge space,Commun

    Z. Huang,Thawing k-essence dark energy in the PAge space,Commun. Theor. Phys.74 (2022) 095404, [2204.09713]

    work page arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    Z. Li, L. Huang and J. Wang,Redshift evolution and non-universal dispersion of quasar luminosity correlation,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.517(2022) 1901–1906, [2210.02816]

    work page arXiv 2022

  64. [64]

    J. Wang, Z. Huang and L. Huang,Revisiting progenitor-age dependence of type Ia supernova luminosity standardization process,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.66(2023) 129511, [2303.15267]

    work page arXiv 2023

  65. [65]

    B. Wang, Y. Liu, H. Yu and P. Wu,Observations Favor the Redshift-evolutionary L𝑋–L𝑈𝑉 Relation of Quasars from Copula,Astrophys. J.962(2024) 103, [2401.01540]

    work page arXiv 2024

  66. [66]

    J. Wang, Z. Huang, Y. Yao, J. Liu, L. Huang and Y. Su,A PAge-like Unified Dark Fluid model,JCAP09(2024) 053, [2405.05798]

    work page arXiv 2024

  67. [67]

    Yao, J.-Q

    Y.-H. Yao, J.-Q. Liu, Z.-Q. Huang, J.-C. Wang and Y. Su,New unified dark sector model and its implications on the𝜎8 and S8 tensions,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 123508, [2409.04678]

    work page arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    W. D. Kenworthy, A. G. Riess, D. Scolnic, W. Yuan, J. L. Bernal, D. Brout et al., Measurements of the Hubble Constant with a Two-rung Distance Ladder: Two Out of Three Ain’t Bad,Astrophys. J.935(2022) 83, [2204.10866]

    work page arXiv 2022

  69. [69]

    W. L. Freedman, B. F. Madore, T. J. Hoyt, I. S. Jang, A. J. Lee and K. A. Owens,Status Report on the Chicago-Carnegie Hubble Program (CCHP): Measurement of the Hubble Constant Using the Hubble and James Webb Space Telescopes,Astrophys. J.985(2025) 203, [2408.06153]

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [70]

    A. G. Riess et al.,JWST Validates HST Distance Measurements: Selection of Supernova Subsample Explains Differences in JWST Estimates of Local H0,Astrophys. J.977(2024) 120, [2408.11770]. [86]DESIcollaboration, M. Abdul Karim et al.,DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 083515,...

    work page arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    Accelerating Universes with Scaling Dark Matter

    M. Chevallier and D. Polarski,Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D10(2001) 213–224, [gr-qc/0009008]. 26 Cosmological intercept tension

    work page Pith review arXiv 2001

  72. [72]

    E. V. Linder,Exploring the expansion history of the universe,Phys. Rev. Lett.90(2003) 091301, [astro-ph/0208512]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2003

  73. [73]

    Evolving dark energy or supernovae systematics?

    G. Efstathiou,Evolving dark energy or supernovae systematics?,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.538(2025) 875–882, [2408.07175]

    work page arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Popovic et al.,A Reassessment of the Pantheon+ and DES 5YR Calibration Uncertainties: Dovekie,2506.05471

    B. Popovic et al.,A Reassessment of the Pantheon+ and DES 5YR Calibration Uncertainties: Dovekie,2506.05471

    work page arXiv

  75. [75]

    D. D. Y. Ong, D. Yallup and W. Handley,A Bayesian Perspective on Evidence for Evolving Dark Energy,2511.10631

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

  76. [76]

    D. D. Y. Ong, D. Yallup and W. Handley,The Bayesian view of DESI DR2: Evidence and tension in a combined analysis with CMB and supernovae across cosmological models, 2603.05472

    work page arXiv

  77. [77]

    D. D. Y. Ong and W. Handley,unimpeded: A Public Nested Sampling Database for Bayesian Cosmology,2511.05470

    work page arXiv

  78. [78]

    D. D. Y. Ong and W. Handley,unimpeded: A Public Grid of Nested Sampling Chains for Cosmological Model Comparison and Tension Analysis,2511.04661

    work page arXiv

  79. [79]

    Wang and D

    D. Wang and D. Mota,Did DESI DR2 truly reveal dynamical dark energy?,Eur. Phys. J. C 85(2025) 1356, [2504.15222]

    work page arXiv 2025

  80. [80]

    T.-N. Li, W. Giarè, G.-H. Du, Y.-H. Li, E. Di Valentino, J.-F. Zhang et al.,Strong Evidence for Dark Sector Interactions,2601.07361

    work page arXiv

Showing first 80 references.