pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.09427 · v1 · pith:UBKL324Vnew · submitted 2026-06-08 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · astro-ph.HE· gr-qc

Modifying ΛCDM dynamics via out-of-equilibrium axions: reconciling SH0ES and DESI H₀ values

Giovanni Montani , Luis A. Escamilla , Nakia Carlevaro , Francesco Cianfrani This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 15:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO astro-ph.HEgr-qc
keywords axionsdark matterHubble tensionSH0ESDESILambda CDMbaryon acoustic oscillations
0
0 comments X

The pith

A small fraction of out-of-equilibrium axions modifies late dark matter density to yield H0 of 73 km/s/Mpc while fitting DESI data.

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

The paper investigates a cosmological model in which axion particles constitute the dark matter and a small fraction drives the system out of thermal equilibrium. This produces a modified evolution equation for the dark matter energy density that departs from standard Lambda CDM only at redshifts below about 1, while recovering the usual behavior at earlier times. Both a kinetic treatment and a classical field description lead to the same macroscopic density equation. When the SH0ES local distance-ladder calibration is added to the dataset, the model is statistically preferred over Lambda CDM and returns a best-fit Hubble constant near 73 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}. The same model continues to match the baryon acoustic oscillation measurements reported by DESI.

Core claim

Using kinetic and classical-field methods for axions produces an identical equation governing dark-matter density evolution; the resulting dynamics alter Lambda CDM only for z less than or equal to 1, asymptotically recovering the standard model at higher redshifts. Statistical comparison with late-universe datasets shows that inclusion of the SH0ES calibration strongly favors the collisional axion scenario over Lambda CDM, with best-fit H0 approximately 73 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}, while preserving excellent agreement with DESI baryon acoustic oscillation data.

What carries the argument

The macroscopic dark-matter density evolution equation obtained from out-of-equilibrium axion dynamics, which governs the collisional axion model and produces redshift-dependent deviations only at z less than or equal to 1.

If this is right

  • The model recovers standard Lambda CDM behavior at high redshifts.
  • It accommodates the higher local Hubble constant from SH0ES distance-ladder measurements.
  • It maintains consistency with DESI baryon acoustic oscillation observations.
  • The best-fit Hubble constant reaches approximately 73 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1} when local calibration is included.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Axion mass and interaction parameters could be further constrained by combining additional low-redshift probes.
  • Deviations in the matter power spectrum or growth rate at z less than 1 might provide independent tests of the out-of-equilibrium effect.
  • Similar late-time modifications could be explored for other cosmological tensions if the same non-equilibrium mechanism applies.

Load-bearing premise

A small fraction of axions is assumed to drive the dark-matter component away from thermal equilibrium, producing a modified density evolution that affects only redshifts below 1.

What would settle it

A high-precision measurement of the Hubble parameter or dark-matter density at redshifts 0.5 to 2 that shows no deviation from standard Lambda CDM predictions would rule out the model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.09427 by Francesco Cianfrani, Giovanni Montani, Luis A. Escamilla, Nakia Carlevaro.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Marginal posteriors (1D and 2D) for the runs of: the Axion model with every data combination (left) and for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Evolution of the reduced Hubble parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate late-Universe dynamics in which the dark matter component is described by axion particles. The proposed framework departs from the standard $\Lambda$CDM paradigm due to a small fraction of axions driving the system away from thermal equilibrium. We analyze the evolution of the axion energy density using both a kinetic and a classical field approach, yielding an identical macroscopic evolution equation for the dark matter density. The resulting scenario modifies $\Lambda$CDM dynamics in the late Universe (specifically at $z \lesssim 1$), while asymptotically recovering the standard baseline at earlier cosmic epochs. We compare the theoretical predictions of our formulation against a comprehensive suite of late-Universe datasets. Our statistical analysis reveals that when the SH0ES local calibration is included, the collisional axion model becomes significantly favored over $\Lambda$CDM, yielding a best-fit Hubble constant of $H_0 \simeq 73~{\rm km\,s^{-1}\,Mpc^{-1}}$. Ultimately, this cosmological scenario successfully accommodates local distance-ladder measurements while maintaining excellent agreement with Baryon Acoustic Oscillation data from the DESI Collaboration.

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 / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a model of out-of-equilibrium axions that modifies the dark-matter density evolution only at z ≲ 1 while asymptotically recovering standard ΛCDM at higher redshifts. Kinetic and classical-field treatments are shown to yield the same macroscopic evolution equation. When SH0ES local calibration is included in the fit, the model is reported to be statistically favored over ΛCDM and to yield a best-fit H₀ ≃ 73 km s⁻¹ Mpc⁻¹ while remaining consistent with DESI BAO measurements.

Significance. If the claimed redshift restriction can be derived without additional free parameters or early-universe leakage, the scenario would provide a late-time-only modification capable of addressing the Hubble tension. The explicit demonstration that the two independent treatments produce identical evolution equations is a methodological strength that should be retained.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract, paragraph 2: the central claim that a small axion fraction automatically confines the density modification to z ≲ 1 (leaving the sound horizon and pre-recombination physics untouched) is load-bearing, yet no explicit expression for the equilibrium-restoration redshift or the interaction rate that enforces this separation is supplied; if that rate depends on the same parameters controlling the low-z deviation, the one-parameter character of the model is not guaranteed.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for identifying a point that requires clarification in the abstract. We address the major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract, paragraph 2: the central claim that a small axion fraction automatically confines the density modification to z ≲ 1 (leaving the sound horizon and pre-recombination physics untouched) is load-bearing, yet no explicit expression for the equilibrium-restoration redshift or the interaction rate that enforces this separation is supplied; if that rate depends on the same parameters controlling the low-z deviation, the one-parameter character of the model is not guaranteed.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit expression for the equilibrium-restoration redshift would make the load-bearing claim more transparent. The model is constructed with a single free parameter (the axion fraction f_a that sets the strength of the out-of-equilibrium interaction). The interaction rate Γ is proportional to f_a, so the redshift at which equilibrium is restored is a derived quantity that scales with f_a; for the small values of f_a required to fit the data, this automatically places the onset of the deviation at z ≲ 1 while ensuring standard evolution at higher redshifts. No additional parameters are introduced. In the revised manuscript we will add the explicit expression for the restoration redshift (derived from the macroscopic evolution equation obtained in both the kinetic and classical-field treatments) directly in the abstract and in the relevant methods section, thereby confirming the one-parameter character and the absence of early-universe leakage. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Fit to SH0ES presented as model accommodation; central dynamics claim lacks quoted reduction to inputs

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
    "when the SH0ES local calibration is included, the collisional axion model becomes significantly favored over ΛCDM, yielding a best-fit Hubble constant of H₀ ≃ 73 km s^{-1} Mpc^{-1}. Ultimately, this cosmological scenario successfully accommodates local distance-ladder measurements while maintaining excellent agreement with Baryon Acoustic Oscillation data from the DESI Collaboration."

    The quoted best-fit H0 and 'accommodates' language are the direct output of fitting the model's parameters to the SH0ES dataset; the reconciliation statement is therefore equivalent to the input fit rather than an independent derivation or out-of-sample test.

full rationale

The paper derives a macroscopic DM density equation from kinetic and classical-field treatments that is asserted to modify only z ≲ 1 while recovering ΛCDM earlier. This is presented as following from a small axion fraction. The statistical claim then fits parameters to SH0ES (plus other data) and states that the model 'accommodates' the local H0. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to a self-citation or to the target H0 value itself; the fit is explicit and the dynamics derivation is independent of the H0 tension data. The interpretation of the fit as 'reconciliation' is interpretive rather than a hidden definitional loop. No other enumerated circularity patterns are exhibited with direct quotes showing reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on an unquantified 'small fraction' of out-of-equilibrium axions and on the assertion that kinetic and classical treatments yield identical macroscopic equations; both are introduced without independent calibration in the abstract.

free parameters (1)
  • out-of-equilibrium axion fraction
    Small fraction introduced to drive departure from thermal equilibrium; value not stated in abstract but required to produce the reported late-time modification.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Kinetic and classical field approaches produce identical macroscopic evolution equation for dark matter density
    Stated directly in abstract as the basis for the density evolution used in the model.
  • ad hoc to paper Modification affects only z ≲ 1 and recovers standard ΛCDM at earlier epochs
    Required for consistency with high-redshift data while allowing late-time adjustment.
invented entities (1)
  • out-of-equilibrium axions no independent evidence
    purpose: To drive departure from thermal equilibrium and modify late-time dark matter density evolution
    New postulated component whose fraction and interaction details are introduced to produce the desired cosmological effect.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5759 in / 1499 out tokens · 22489 ms · 2026-06-27T15:51:46.045001+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

206 extracted references · 6 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Steven Weinberg,Cosmology(Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK) (2008)

    2008

  2. [2]

    Kolb and Michael S

    Edward W. Kolb and Michael S. Turner,The Early Universe, Frontiers in Physics (Addison-Wesley, Redwood City, CA) (1990)

    1990

  3. [3]

    Verde, T

    L. Verde, T. Treu and A. G. Riess,Nature Astron.3, 891 (2019)

    2019

  4. [4]

    Phys.131, 102605 (2021)

    Eleonora Di Valentinoet al.,Astropart. Phys.131, 102605 (2021)

    2021

  5. [5]

    Mota, Adam G

    Eleonora Di Valentino, Olga Mena, Supriya Pan, Luca Visinelli, Weiqiang Yang, Alessandro Melchiorri, David F. Mota, Adam G. Riess and Joseph Silk,Class. Quant. Grav.38, 153001 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    Rev.95, 101659 (2022)

    Leandros Perivolaropoulos and Foteini Skara,New Astron. Rev.95, 101659 (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    Witte, Vivian Poulin and Julien Lesgour- gues,Phys

    Nils Sch¨ oneberg, Guillermo Franco Abell´ an, Andrea P´ erez S´ anchez, Samuel J. Witte, Vivian Poulin and Julien Lesgour- gues,Phys. Rept.984, 1 (2022)

    2022

  8. [8]

    Astrophys

    Paul Shah, Pablo Lemos and Ofer Lahav,Astron. Astrophys. Rev.29, 9 (2021)

    2021

  9. [9]

    Elcio Abdallaet al.,JHEAp34, 49 (2022)

    2022

  10. [10]

    Eleonora Di Valentino,Universe8, 399 (2022)

    2022

  11. [11]

    Riess,Ann

    Marc Kamionkowski and Adam G. Riess,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.73, 153 (2023)

    2023

  12. [12]

    Jian-Ping Hu and Fa-Yin Wang,Universe9, 94 (2023)

    2023

  13. [13]

    William Giar` e,≪CMB Anomalies and the Hubble Tension ≫, (2023)

    2023

  14. [14]

    Sunny Vagnozzi,Universe9, 393 (2023)

    2023

  15. [15]

    Licia Verde, Nils Sch¨ oneberg and H´ ector Gil-Mar´ ın,arXiv e-prints(2023)

    2023

  16. [16]

    Eleonora Di Valentino and Dillon Brout (Ed.),The Hubble Constant Tension, Springer Series in Astrophysics and Cos- mology (Springer) (2024)

    2024

  17. [17]

    Leandros Perivolaropoulos, ≪Hubble Tension or Distance Ladder Crisis? ≫, (2024)

    2024

  18. [18]

    Colg´ ain, Anjan A

    ¨Ozg¨ ur Akarsu, Eoin´O. Colg´ ain, Anjan A. Sen and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari,Universe10, 305 (2024)

    2024

  19. [19]

    Dark Univ.49, 101965 (2025)

    Eleonora Di Valentinoet al.,Phys. Dark Univ.49, 101965 (2025)

    2025

  20. [20]

    Riesset al.,Astrophys

    Adam G. Riesset al.,Astrophys. J. Lett.934, L7 (2022)

    2022

  21. [21]

    Riess, Stefano Casertano, Wenlong Yuan, Lucas M

    Louise Breuval, Adam G. Riess, Stefano Casertano, Wenlong Yuan, Lucas M. Macri, Martino Romaniello, Yukei S. Murakami, Daniel Scolnic, Gagandeep S. Anand and Igor Soszy´ nski,arXiv:2404.08038973, 30 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    Aghanimet al.,A& A641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys

    N. Aghanimet al.,A& A641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

    2020

  23. [23]

    Camphuiset al., ≪SPT-3G D1: CMB temperature and polarization power spectra and cosmology from 2019 and 2020 observations of the SPT-3G Main field ≫, (2025)

    E. Camphuiset al., ≪SPT-3G D1: CMB temperature and polarization power spectra and cosmology from 2019 and 2020 observations of the SPT-3G Main field ≫, (2025)

    2019

  24. [24]

    Stefano Casertanoet al., ≪The Local Distance Network: a community consensus report on the measurement of the Hubble constant at 1% precision ≫, (2025)

    2025

  25. [25]

    Riess,Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science73, 153 (2023)

    Marc Kamionkowski and Adam G. Riess,Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science73, 153 (2023)

    2023

  26. [26]

    Carlos Silva,Classical and Quantum Gravity42, 245002 (2025)

    2025

  27. [27]

    Smith, Tanvi Karwal and Marc Kamionkowski,Phys

    Vivian Poulin, Tristan L. Smith, Tanvi Karwal and Marc Kamionkowski,Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 221301 (2019)

    2019

  28. [28]

    Tanvi Karwal and Marc Kamionkowski,Phys. Rev. D94, 103523 (2016). 9

    2016

  29. [29]

    Colin Hill, Evan McDonough, Michael W

    J. Colin Hill, Evan McDonough, Michael W. Toomey and Stephon Alexander,Phys. Rev. D102, 043507 (2020)

    2020

  30. [30]

    Ivanov, Evan McDonough, J

    Mikhail M. Ivanov, Evan McDonough, J. Colin Hill, Marko Simonovi´ c, Michael W. Toomey, Stephon Alexander and Matias Zaldarriaga,Phys. Rev. D102, 103502 (2020)

    2020

  31. [31]

    Jeremy Sakstein and Mark Trodden,Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 161301 (2020)

    2020

  32. [32]

    Sloth,Phys

    Florian Niedermann and Martin S. Sloth,Phys. Rev. D103, L041303 (2021)

    2021

  33. [33]

    Sloth,Phys

    Florian Niedermann and Martin S. Sloth,Phys. Rev. D102, 063527 (2020)

    2020

  34. [34]

    Smith and Tanvi Karwal,Phys

    Vivian Poulin, Tristan L. Smith and Tanvi Karwal,Phys. Dark Univ.42, 101348 (2023)

    2023

  35. [35]

    Adam Smith, Philippe Brax, Carsten van de Bruck, C. P. Burgess and Anne-Christine Davis,Eur. Phys. J. C85, 1062 (2025)

    2025

  36. [36]

    Smith, Rodrigo Calder´ on and Th´ eo Simon,≪Impact of ACT DR6 and DESI DR2 for Early Dark Energy and the Hubble tension ≫, (2025)

    Vivian Poulin, Tristan L. Smith, Rodrigo Calder´ on and Th´ eo Simon,≪Impact of ACT DR6 and DESI DR2 for Early Dark Energy and the Hubble tension ≫, (2025)

    2025

  37. [37]

    A. R. Khalifeet al., ≪SPT-3G D1: Axion Early Dark Energy with CMB experiments and DESI ≫, (2025)

    2025

  38. [38]

    Chiara Caprini and Nicola Tamanini,JCAP10, 006 (2016)

    2016

  39. [39]

    Nunes, Supriya Pan and Emmanuel N

    Rafael C. Nunes, Supriya Pan and Emmanuel N. Saridakis,Phys. Rev. D94, 023508 (2016)

    2016

  40. [40]

    Nunes,Phys

    Suresh Kumar and Rafael C. Nunes,Phys. Rev. D96, 103511 (2017)

    2017

  41. [41]

    Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri and Olga Mena,Phys. Rev. D96, 043503 (2017)

    2017

  42. [42]

    Mota,Phys

    Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan and David F. Mota,Phys. Rev. D96, 123508 (2017)

    2017

  43. [43]

    Costa, Ricardo C

    Andre A. Costa, Ricardo C. G. Landim, Bin Wang and E. Abdalla,Eur. Phys. J. C78, 746 (2018)

    2018

  44. [44]

    von Marttens, L

    R. von Marttens, L. Casarini, D. F. Mota and W. Zimdahl,Phys. Dark Univ.23, 100248 (2019)

    2019

  45. [45]

    Nunes, Sunny Vagnozzi and David F

    Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Eleonora Di Valentino, Rafael C. Nunes, Sunny Vagnozzi and David F. Mota,JCAP09, 019 (2018)

    2018

  46. [46]

    Weiqiang Yang, Ankan Mukherjee, Eleonora Di Valentino and Supriya Pan,Phys. Rev. D98, 123527 (2018)

    2018

  47. [47]

    Saridakis and Subenoy Chakraborty,Phys

    Supriya Pan, Weiqiang Yang, Eleonora Di Valentino, Emmanuel N. Saridakis and Subenoy Chakraborty,Phys. Rev. D 100, 103520 (2019)

    2019

  48. [48]

    Nunes and Santosh Kumar Yadav,Eur

    Suresh Kumar, Rafael C. Nunes and Santosh Kumar Yadav,Eur. Phys. J. C79, 576 (2019)

    2019

  49. [49]

    Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Olga Mena and Sunny Vagnozzi,Phys. Rev. D101, 063502 (2020)

    2020

  50. [50]

    Dark Univ.30, 100666 (2020)

    Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Olga Mena and Sunny Vagnozzi,Phys. Dark Univ.30, 100666 (2020)

    2020

  51. [51]

    Eleonora Di Valentino, Alessandro Melchiorri, Olga Mena, Supriya Pan and Weiqiang Yang,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 502, L23 (2021)

    2021

  52. [52]

    Adri` a G´ omez-Valent, Valeria Pettorino and Luca Amendola,Phys. Rev. D101, 123513 (2020)

    2020

  53. [53]

    Hooper,Phys

    Matteo Lucca and Deanna C. Hooper,Phys. Rev. D102, 123502 (2020)

    2020

  54. [54]

    Sharov and Weiqiang Yang,Phys

    Supriya Pan, German S. Sharov and Weiqiang Yang,Phys. Rev. D101, 103533 (2020)

    2020

  55. [55]

    Li-Yang Gao, Ze-Wei Zhao, She-Sheng Xue and Xin Zhang,JCAP07, 005 (2021)

    2021

  56. [56]

    Dark Univ.33, 100862 (2021)

    Suresh Kumar,Phys. Dark Univ.33, 100862 (2021)

    2021

  57. [57]

    Weiqiang Yang, Supriya Pan, Eleonora Di Valentino, Olga Mena and Alessandro Melchiorri,JCAP10, 008 (2021)

    2021

  58. [58]

    Nunes, Sunny Vagnozzi, Suresh Kumar, Eleonora Di Valentino and Olga Mena,Phys

    Rafael C. Nunes, Sunny Vagnozzi, Suresh Kumar, Eleonora Di Valentino and Olga Mena,Phys. Rev. D105, 123506 (2022)

    2022

  59. [59]

    Nunes,Phys

    Armando Bernui, Eleonora Di Valentino, William Giar` e, Suresh Kumar and Rafael C. Nunes,Phys. Rev. D107, 103531 (2023)

    2023

  60. [60]

    Escamilla, Ozgur Akarsu, Eleonora Di Valentino and J

    Luis A. Escamilla, Ozgur Akarsu, Eleonora Di Valentino and J. Alberto Vazquez,JCAP11, 051 (2023)

    2023

  61. [61]

    Sabogal, Rafael C

    William Giar` e, Miguel A. Sabogal, Rafael C. Nunes and Eleonora Di Valentino,arXiv:2404.15232133, 251003 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  62. [62]

    J.976, 1 (2024)

    Tian-Nuo Li, Peng-Ju Wu, Guo-Hong Du, Shang-Jie Jin, Hai-Li Li, Jing-Fei Zhang and Xin Zhang,Astrophys. J.976, 1 (2024)

    2024

  63. [63]

    Sabogal, Emanuelly Silva, Rafael C

    Miguel A. Sabogal, Emanuelly Silva, Rafael C. Nunes, Suresh Kumar and Eleonora Di Valentino,Phys. Rev. D111, 043531 (2025)

    2025

  64. [64]

    Sabogal, Mateus Scherer, Rafael C

    Emanuelly Silva, Miguel A. Sabogal, Mateus Scherer, Rafael C. Nunes, Eleonora Di Valentino and Suresh Kumar,Phys. Rev. D111, 123511 (2025)

    2025

  65. [65]

    Weiqiang Yang, Sibo Zhang, Olga Mena, Supriya Pan and Eleonora Di Valentino, ≪Dark Energy Is Not That Into You: Variable Couplings after DESI DR2 BAO ≫, (2025)

    2025

  66. [66]

    Dark Univ.50, 102121 (2025)

    Marcel van der Westhuizen, Amare Abebe and Eleonora Di Valentino,Phys. Dark Univ.50, 102121 (2025)

    2025

  67. [67]

    China Phys

    Tian-Nuo Li, Guo-Hong Du, Yun-He Li, Peng-Ju Wu, Shang-Jie Jin, Jing-Fei Zhang and Xin Zhang,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.69, 210413 (2026)

    2026

  68. [68]

    Tian-Nuo Li, William Giar` e, Guo-Hong Du, Yun-He Li, Eleonora Di Valentino, Jing-Fei Zhang and Xin Zhang, ≪Strong Evidence for Dark Sector Interactions ≫, (2026)

    2026

  69. [69]

    Feng,Ann

    Jonathan L. Feng,Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.48, 495 (2010)

    2010

  70. [70]

    Widrow,Phys

    Scott Dodelson and Lawrence M. Widrow,Phys. Rev. Lett.72, 17 (1994)

    1994

  71. [71]

    Rept.568, 1 (2015)

    Austin Joyce, Bhuvnesh Jain, Justin Khoury and Mark Trodden,Phys. Rept.568, 1 (2015)

    2015

  72. [72]

    K. N. Abazajianet al., ≪Light Sterile Neutrinos: A White Paper ≫, (2012)

    2012

  73. [73]

    Copeland, M

    Edmund J. Copeland, M. Sami and Shinji Tsujikawa,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D15, 1753 (2006)

    2006

  74. [74]

    Astrophys.668, A135 (2022)

    Denitsa Staicova and David Benisty,Astron. Astrophys.668, A135 (2022)

    2022

  75. [75]

    Astrophys.647, A38 (2021)

    David Benisty and Denitsa Staicova,Astron. Astrophys.647, A38 (2021)

    2021

  76. [76]

    Odintsov,Astrophys

    Kazuharu Bamba, Salvatore Capozziello, Shin’ichi Nojiri and Sergei D. Odintsov,Astrophys. Space Sci.342, 155 (2012)

    2012

  77. [77]

    Wolf, Carlos Garc´ ıa-Garc´ ıa, Deaglan J

    William J. Wolf, Carlos Garc´ ıa-Garc´ ıa, Deaglan J. Bartlett and Pedro G. Ferreira,Phys. Rev. D110, 083528 (2024)

    2024

  78. [78]

    Ferreira, Antonio Padilla and Constantinos Skordis,Phys

    Timothy Clifton, Pedro G. Ferreira, Antonio Padilla and Constantinos Skordis,Phys. Rept.513, 1 (2012). 10

    2012

  79. [79]

    An Update by the CANTATA Network(Springer) (2021)

    Yashar Akramiet al.,Modified Gravity and Cosmology. An Update by the CANTATA Network(Springer) (2021)

    2021

  80. [80]

    Dialektopoulos, Celia Escamilla-Rivera, Gabriel Farrugia, Viktor Gakis, Martin Hendry, Manuel Hohmann, Jackson Levi Said, Jurgen Mifsud and Eleonora Di Valentino,Rept

    Sebastian Bahamonde, Konstantinos F. Dialektopoulos, Celia Escamilla-Rivera, Gabriel Farrugia, Viktor Gakis, Martin Hendry, Manuel Hohmann, Jackson Levi Said, Jurgen Mifsud and Eleonora Di Valentino,Rept. Prog. Phys.86, 026901 (2023)

    2023

Showing first 80 references.