Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 81 references

A nonparametric expansion–growth reconstruction simultaneously recovers the dark-energy equation of state and the dark-sector coupling, breaking their background degeneracy, and finds both consistent with ΛCDM.

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

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-14 02:59 UTC pith:ZVJBRE5N

load-bearing objection Useful nonparametric expansion–growth test that claims to break the DE–interaction degeneracy and finds LCDM consistency on DESI-era data; abstract-only, so the growth-channel details remain unchecked. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.11813 v1 pith:ZVJBRE5N submitted 2026-07-13 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-ph

Breaking the Dark Sector Degeneracy with Nonparametric Expansion--Growth Reconstruction

Changyu You , Rong-Gen Cai , Tao Yang This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-ph
keywords dark energydark-sector interactionGaussian processesexpansion historygrowth of structureredshift-space distortionsnonparametric reconstructionΛCDM
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The same cosmic expansion history can be read as time-varying dark energy, energy exchange with dark matter, or a mixture of both. This paper argues that a data-driven, nonparametric reconstruction of both the expansion history and the linear growth of structure lifts that degeneracy. By letting the interacting matter density evolve freely and folding the coupling into the linear matter perturbation equation, Gaussian processes (with hyperparameters marginalized) jointly reconstruct the dark-energy equation of state w_de(z) and the interaction history over 0 ≲ z ≲ 2. Applied to Pantheon+, cosmic chronometers, BAO including DESI DR2, and redshift-space-distortion data, both quantities remain consistent with a cosmological constant and zero interaction. The result supplies a model-independent expansion–growth consistency test that can separate genuine dark-energy dynamics from effective dark-sector energy exchange.

Core claim

A data-driven nonparametric expansion–growth framework that simultaneously reconstructs w_de(z) and the dark-sector coupling, by incorporating a freely evolving interacting-matter density into the linear growth equation, breaks the background degeneracy between time-varying dark energy and dark-sector energy exchange; applied to current expansion and growth data, both the reconstructed coupling and w_de(z) stay consistent with the ΛCDM limit over 0 ≲ z ≲ 2, with no statistically significant evidence for nonzero interaction or dark-energy dynamics.

What carries the argument

Gaussian-process reconstruction of the expansion and growth histories in which a freely evolving interacting-matter density is folded into the linear matter perturbation equation, with the Gaussian-process hyperparameters marginalized in a Bayesian treatment; this supplies the joint, nonparametric maps of w_de(z) and the coupling that break the background degeneracy.

Load-bearing premise

That putting a freely evolving interacting-matter density into the linear growth equation is a sufficient and unbiased way for redshift-space-distortion data to break the background degeneracy, without leftover model dependence from nonlinear scales, bias modeling, or the precise form of the coupling term.

What would settle it

A statistically significant nonzero reconstructed interaction history, or a w_de(z) that clearly deviates from −1, when the identical nonparametric pipeline is run on the same or future combined expansion-plus-growth data sets; alternatively, a clear interaction recovered by independent parametric analyses of the same data while this method returns a null result would challenge the reconstruction channel itself.

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

If this is right

  • Both w_de(z) and the dark-sector interaction history can be recovered jointly without assuming a parametric form for either quantity.
  • Expansion and growth data together form a consistency test that can distinguish genuine dark-energy dynamics from effective energy exchange.
  • Current data (Pantheon+, chronometers, BAO including DESI DR2, RSD) show no statistically significant departure from a cosmological constant with zero coupling.
  • The same nonparametric pipeline can be reapplied to future tighter expansion and growth measurements to strengthen or overturn the null result.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Any residual systematics from nonlinear scales or galaxy bias that survive the linear growth treatment could still mimic or mask a weak interaction signal.
  • The same expansion–growth consistency logic could be extended to modified-gravity models that alter growth independently of the background expansion.
  • A future statistically significant nonzero reconstructed coupling would force any apparent w_de(z) evolution to be re-read, at least in part, as energy exchange rather than pure dark-energy dynamics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that the well-known background degeneracy between a time-varying dark-energy equation of state w_de(z) and a dark-sector energy exchange can be broken by a nonparametric joint reconstruction of expansion and growth. The interacting matter density is allowed to evolve freely and is folded into the linear matter perturbation equation; both the expansion history and the growth history are then reconstructed with Gaussian processes whose hyperparameters are marginalized in a Bayesian treatment. Applied to Pantheon+, cosmic chronometers, BAO (including DESI DR2), and RSD data, the method yields reconstructions of w_de(z) and of the interaction history over 0 ≲ z ≲ 2 that remain statistically consistent with the ΛCDM limit, with no significant evidence for either nonzero coupling or dark-energy dynamics.

Significance. If the technical implementation is sound, the work would supply a useful, largely model-independent expansion–growth consistency test for coupled dark-sector scenarios and a concrete route for distinguishing genuine dark-energy dynamics from effective energy exchange. The nonparametric GP approach with Bayesian hyperparameter marginalization, the inclusion of recent DESI DR2 BAO, and the explicit null result relative to ΛCDM are strengths that would be of interest to the community. Because only the abstract is available for this review, however, the load-bearing technical steps cannot yet be verified, so the significance assessment remains provisional.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract (growth equation / coupling incorporation)] The central claim that the background degeneracy is broken rests on the assertion that a freely evolving interacting-matter density can be incorporated into the linear matter perturbation equation in a manner that is both sufficient and unbiased for RSD data. Without the explicit form of that modified growth ODE, the definition of the free interacting density, and the mapping from coupling to growth, it is impossible to assess whether residual model dependence (bias modeling, nonlinear scales, or the precise coupling channel) remains. This is load-bearing for the model-independence claim and must be fully specified and justified.
  2. [Abstract (null-result statement)] The abstract states that both the reconstructed coupling and w_de(z) are consistent with ΛCDM and that there is no statistically significant evidence for interaction or dynamics. The quantitative significance of this null result (posterior widths, tension metrics, or Bayes factors relative to ΛCDM) is not given. Without those numbers and the associated covariance treatment of the combined Pantheon+/chronometer/BAO/RSD data set, the strength of the null claim cannot be evaluated.
  3. [Abstract (GP reconstruction)] Gaussian-process kernel choice and hyperparameter marginalization are described only at the level of a slogan. Kernel misspecification or incomplete marginalization can bias nonparametric reconstructions of w_de(z) and of the interaction history. The manuscript must document the kernels, the prior ranges, the marginalization procedure, and any robustness checks against alternative kernels before the reconstructions can be trusted.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract is clear and well written, but the redshift range 0 ≲ z ≲ 2 should be tied more explicitly to the leverage of each data set (especially RSD and DESI DR2) once the full text is available.
  2. [Abstract] Terminology such as “freely evolving interacting matter density” and “expansion–growth consistency test” should be defined with equations at first use so that the reader can see precisely what is reconstructed versus what is assumed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity identifiable from abstract-only material; claimed reconstruction is framed against external data, not as a self-defined prediction.

full rationale

Only the abstract is available, so no equations, GP kernels, growth ODE, or self-citations can be inspected for definitional reduction. The abstract presents a nonparametric joint reconstruction of w_de(z) and dark-sector coupling from external datasets (Pantheon+, chronometers, BAO/DESI DR2, RSD), with freely evolving interacting matter density folded into the linear growth equation and GP hyperparameters marginalized Bayesianly. The reported outcome is consistency with the ΛCDM limit (null result for interaction and DE dynamics), not a fitted quantity re-labeled as a prediction. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz smuggled via self-citation, or self-definitional step is stated. Residual methodological risk (whether the linear-growth channel is unbiased) is a correctness/assumption issue, not circularity under the stated rules. With no quotable reduction of claim to input by construction, the honest finding is score 0 and empty steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only: free parameters are those implicit in any GP reconstruction (kernel hyperparameters, marginalized); axioms are standard cosmological linear theory plus the modeling choice that free interacting-matter density plus coupling in the growth equation breaks the degeneracy without residual bias. No new particles or forces are invented; the coupling is the standard interacting dark-sector degree of freedom.

free parameters (1)
  • GP kernel hyperparameters (length scales, variances, etc.)
    Gaussian-process reconstructions always introduce kernel hyperparameters; the abstract states they are marginalized Bayesianly, so they are free parameters of the method even if integrated out rather than fixed by hand.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption Linear cosmological perturbation theory remains an adequate description of the growth observables (RSD) once the dark-sector coupling is inserted into the matter density evolution equation.
    Load-bearing for using growth to break the background degeneracy; invoked when the abstract incorporates the coupling into the linear matter perturbation equation.
  • domain assumption Gaussian processes with Bayesian hyperparameter marginalization provide a sufficiently flexible, unbiased nonparametric prior for both expansion and growth histories over 0≲z≲2.
    Standard in nonparametric cosmology reconstructions; the abstract relies on it for model-independence claims.
  • domain assumption The chosen external datasets (Pantheon+, cosmic chronometers, BAO including DESI DR2, RSD) are mutually consistent enough for a joint reconstruction without dominant systematics that would fake or hide an interaction.
    Implicit in any multi-probe cosmological inference; not proven in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 6143 in / 2643 out tokens · 63077 ms · 2026-07-14T02:59:25.056212+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The dark energy equation of state (EoS) and a possible dark-sector interaction are degenerate at the level of background expansion: the same expansion history may be interpreted as time-varying dark energy, energy exchange with dark matter, or a mixture of both. We introduce a data-driven, nonparametric expansion--growth framework that breaks this degeneracy by simultaneously reconstructing the dark energy EoS and the dark-sector coupling. Allowing the interacting matter density to evolve freely, we incorporate the coupling into the linear matter perturbation equation and reconstruct the expansion and growth histories using Gaussian processes, with hyperparameters marginalized in a Bayesian treatment. Applying this method to Pantheon+, cosmic chronometers, BAO measurements including DESI DR2, and redshift-space-distortion data, we infer both $w_{\rm de}(z)$ and the interaction history over $0\lesssim z\lesssim 2$, without assuming either a parametric EoS or a prescribed interaction form. We find no statistically significant evidence for either a nonzero interaction or dark energy dynamics: the reconstructed coupling and dark energy EoS remain consistent with the $\Lambda$CDM limit. Our results establish an expansion--growth consistency test for coupled dark-sector physics and provide a model-independent route to distinguish genuine dark energy dynamics from effective dark-sector energy exchange.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.11813 by Changyu You, Rong-Gen Cai, Tao Yang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Reconstructions of the dark energy equation of state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Reconstruction of the dark energy equation of state and the dark-sector interaction from the mock data under [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Same as figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Same as figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Reconstructions of the dark energy equation of state and the dark-sector interaction for single expansion datasets [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Same as figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Reconstructions of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Reconstructions of the dark energy equation of state and the dark-sector interaction for single expansion datasets [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Same as figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png] view at source ↗

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

81 extracted references · 73 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    A. G. Riesset al.(Supernova Search Team), Observa- tional evidence from supernovae for an accelerating uni- verse and a cosmological constant, Astron. J.116, 1009 (1998), arXiv:astro-ph/9805201

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  2. [2]

    Perlmutteret al.(Supernova Cosmology Project), Measurements ofΩandΛfrom 42 High Redshift Su- pernovae, Astrophys

    S. Perlmutteret al.(Supernova Cosmology Project), Measurements ofΩandΛfrom 42 High Redshift Su- pernovae, Astrophys. J.517, 565 (1999), arXiv:astro- ph/9812133

    arXiv 1999

  3. [3]

    M.Tegmarket al.(SDSS),Cosmologicalparametersfrom SDSS and WMAP, Phys. Rev. D69, 103501 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0310723

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  4. [4]

    D. J. Eisensteinet al.(SDSS), Detection of the Baryon Acoustic Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Function of SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies, Astrophys. J.633, 560 (2005), arXiv:astro-ph/0501171

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  5. [5]

    Hinshawet al.(WMAP), Nine-Year Wilkinson Mi- crowave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cos- mological Parameter Results, Astrophys

    G. Hinshawet al.(WMAP), Nine-Year Wilkinson Mi- crowave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cos- mological Parameter Results, Astrophys. J. Suppl.208, 19 (2013), arXiv:1212.5226 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  6. [6]

    C.-H. Chuanget al., The clustering of galaxies in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: single-probe measurements and the strong power of nor- malized growth rate on constraining dark energy, Mon. Not.Roy.Astron.Soc.433,3559(2013),arXiv:1303.4486 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  7. [7]

    Aghanimet al.(Planck), Planck 2018 results

    N. Aghanimet al.(Planck), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    Zlatev, L.-M

    I. Zlatev, L.-M. Wang, and P. J. Steinhardt, Quintessence, cosmic coincidence, and the cosmological constant, Phys. Rev. Lett.82, 896 (1999), arXiv:astro- ph/9807002

    arXiv 1999

  9. [9]

    Sahni and A

    V. Sahni and A. A. Starobinsky, The Case for a positive cosmological Lambda term, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D9, 373 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9904398

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  10. [10]

    Weinberg, The Cosmological constant problems, in 4th International Symposium on Sources and Detection of Dark Matter in the Universe (DM 2000)(2000) pp

    S. Weinberg, The Cosmological constant problems, in 4th International Symposium on Sources and Detection of Dark Matter in the Universe (DM 2000)(2000) pp. 18–26, arXiv:astro-ph/0005265

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  11. [11]

    A. G. Riesset al., A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s−1 Mpc−1 UncertaintyfromtheHubbleSpaceTelescopeand the SH0ES Team, Astrophys. J. Lett.934, L7 (2022), arXiv:2112.04510 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  12. [12]

    E. J. Copeland, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa, Dynamics of dark energy, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D15, 1753 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0603057

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  13. [13]

    Tsujikawa, Quintessence: A Review, Class

    S. Tsujikawa, Quintessence: A Review, Class. Quant. Grav.30, 214003 (2013), arXiv:1304.1961 [gr-qc]. 6

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  14. [14]

    Armendariz-Picon, V

    C. Armendariz-Picon, V. F. Mukhanov, and P. J. Stein- hardt, Essentials of k essence, Phys. Rev. D63, 103510 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0006373

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  15. [15]

    E. V. Linder, The Dynamics of Quintessence, The Quintessence of Dynamics, Gen. Rel. Grav.40, 329 (2008), arXiv:0704.2064 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  16. [16]

    E. N. Saridakis and S. V. Sushkov, Quintessence and phantom cosmology with non-minimal derivative cou- pling, Phys. Rev. D81, 083510 (2010), arXiv:1002.3478 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  17. [17]

    Kunz and D

    M. Kunz and D. Sapone, Dark Energy versus Modified Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 121301 (2007), arXiv:astro- ph/0612452

    arXiv 2007

  18. [18]

    Clifton, P

    T. Clifton, P. G. Ferreira, A. Padilla, and C. Skordis, Modified Gravity and Cosmology, Phys. Rept.513, 1 (2012), arXiv:1106.2476 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  19. [19]

    Hu and I

    W. Hu and I. Sawicki, Models of f(R) Cosmic Acceler- ation that Evade Solar-System Tests, Phys. Rev. D76, 064004 (2007), arXiv:0705.1158 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  20. [20]

    Amendola, Coupled quintessence, Phys

    L. Amendola, Coupled quintessence, Phys. Rev. D62, 043511 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9908023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  21. [21]

    Shahalam, S

    M. Shahalam, S. D. Pathak, M. M. Verma, M. Y. Khlopov, and R. Myrzakulov, Dynamics of interact- ing quintessence, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 395 (2015), arXiv:1503.08712 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  22. [22]

    Pourtsidou, C

    A. Pourtsidou, C. Skordis, and E. J. Copeland, Models of dark matter coupled to dark energy, Phys. Rev. D88, 083505 (2013), arXiv:1307.0458 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  23. [23]

    A. A. Costa, X.-D. Xu, B. Wang, and E. Abdalla, Con- straints on interacting dark energy models from Planck 2015 and redshift-space distortion data, JCAP01, 028, arXiv:1605.04138 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  24. [24]

    Giarè, M

    W. Giarè, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes, and E. Di Valentino, Interacting Dark Energy after DESI Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 251003 (2024), arXiv:2404.15232 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    B. R. Dinda, A new diagnostic for the null test of dynam- ical dark energy in light of DESI 2024 and other BAO data, JCAP09, 062, arXiv:2405.06618 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    B.R.DindaandR.Maartens,Model-agnosticassessment of dark energy after DESI DR1 BAO, JCAP01, 120, arXiv:2407.17252 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  27. [27]

    Calderonet al.(DESI), DESI 2024: reconstruct- ing dark energy using crossing statistics with DESI DR1 BAO data, JCAP10, 048, arXiv:2405.04216 [astro- ph.CO]

    R. Calderonet al.(DESI), DESI 2024: reconstruct- ing dark energy using crossing statistics with DESI DR1 BAO data, JCAP10, 048, arXiv:2405.04216 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    R. E. Keeley, K. N. Abazajian, M. Kaplinghat, and A. Shafieloo, Preference for evolving dark energy from cosmological distance measurements and possible signa- tures in the growth rate of perturbations, Phys. Rev. D 112, 043501 (2025), arXiv:2502.12667 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Cortês and A

    M. Cortês and A. R. Liddle, Interpreting DESI’s evidence for evolving dark energy, JCAP12, 007, arXiv:2404.08056 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [30]

    A. G. Adameet al.(DESI), DESI 2024 VI: cosmologi- cal constraints from the measurements of baryon acous- tic oscillations, JCAP02, 021, arXiv:2404.03002 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), DESI DR2 results

    M. Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cos- mological constraints, Phys. Rev. D112, 083515 (2025), arXiv:2503.14738 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Guet al.(DESI), Dynamical dark energy in light of the DESI DR2 baryonic acoustic oscillations measure- ments, Nature Astron.9, 1879 (2025), [Erratum: Nature Astron

    G. Guet al.(DESI), Dynamical dark energy in light of the DESI DR2 baryonic acoustic oscillations measure- ments, Nature Astron.9, 1879 (2025), [Erratum: Nature Astron. 9, 1898 (2025)], arXiv:2504.06118 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Giarè, M

    W. Giarè, M. Najafi, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, and J. T. Firouzjaee, Robust preference for Dynamical Dark En- ergy in DESI BAO and SN measurements, JCAP10, 035, arXiv:2407.16689 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  34. [34]

    Lodhaet al.(DESI), Extended dark energy analysis using DESI DR2 BAO measurements, Phys

    K. Lodhaet al.(DESI), Extended dark energy analysis using DESI DR2 BAO measurements, Phys. Rev. D112, 083511 (2025), arXiv:2503.14743 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Kunz, The dark degeneracy: On the number and nature of dark components, Phys

    M. Kunz, The dark degeneracy: On the number and nature of dark components, Phys. Rev. D80, 123001 (2009), arXiv:astro-ph/0702615

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  36. [36]

    von Marttens, L

    R. von Marttens, L. Lombriser, M. Kunz, V. Marra, L. Casarini, and J. Alcaniz, Dark degeneracy I: Dynam- ical or interacting dark energy?, Phys. Dark Univ.28, 100490 (2020), arXiv:1911.02618 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  37. [37]

    Yang, Z.-K

    T. Yang, Z.-K. Guo, and R.-G. Cai, Reconstructing the interaction between dark energy and dark matter using Gaussian Processes, Phys. Rev. D91, 123533 (2015), arXiv:1505.04443 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  38. [38]

    Yang, Model-Independent Perspectives on Coupled Dark Energy and the Swampland, Phys

    T. Yang, Model-Independent Perspectives on Coupled Dark Energy and the Swampland, Phys. Rev. D102, 083511 (2020), arXiv:2006.14511 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  39. [39]

    C. You, D. Wang, and T. Yang, Dynamical dark energy implies a coupled dark sector: Insights from DESI DR2 via a data-driven approach, Phys. Rev. D112, 043503 (2025), arXiv:2504.00985 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Wang, G.-B

    Y. Wang, G.-B. Zhao, D. Wands, L. Pogosian, and R. G. Crittenden, Reconstruction of the dark matter–vacuum energy interaction, Phys. Rev. D92, 103005 (2015), arXiv:1505.01373 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  41. [41]

    Abedin, G.-J

    M. Abedin, G.-J. Wang, Y.-Z. Ma, and S. Pan, In search of an interaction in the dark sector through Gaussian Process and ANN approaches, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.540, 2253 (2025), arXiv:2505.04336 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Mukherjee and N

    P. Mukherjee and N. Banerjee, Nonparametric recon- struction of interaction in the cosmic dark sector, Phys. Rev. D103, 123530 (2021), arXiv:2105.09995 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  43. [43]

    Bonilla, S

    A. Bonilla, S. Kumar, R. C. Nunes, and S. Pan, Re- construction of the dark sectors’ interaction: A model- independent inference and forecast from GW standard sirens, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.512, 4231 (2022), arXiv:2102.06149 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  44. [44]

    Pettorino and C

    V. Pettorino and C. Baccigalupi, Coupled and Extended Quintessence: theoretical differences and structure for- mation,Phys.Rev.D77,103003(2008),arXiv:0802.1086 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  45. [45]

    Wetterich, Modified gravity and coupled quintessence, Lect

    C. Wetterich, Modified gravity and coupled quintessence, Lect. Notes Phys.892, 57 (2015), arXiv:1402.5031 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  46. [46]

    Postma and M

    M. Postma and M. Volponi, Equivalence of the Einstein and Jordan frames, Phys. Rev. D90, 103516 (2014), arXiv:1407.6874 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  47. [47]

    Chudaykin and M

    A. Chudaykin and M. Kunz, Modified gravity inter- pretation of the evolving dark energy in light of DESI data, Phys. Rev. D110, 123524 (2024), arXiv:2407.02558 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  48. [48]

    G. Ye, M. Martinelli, B. Hu, and A. Silvestri, Hints of Nonminimally Coupled Gravity in DESI 2024 Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 181002 (2025), arXiv:2407.15832 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  49. [49]

    W. J. Wolf, P. G. Ferreira, and C. García-García, Match- 7 ing current observational constraints with nonminimally coupled dark energy, Phys. Rev. D111, L041303 (2025), arXiv:2409.17019 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    W. J. Wolf, C. García-García, T. Anton, and P. G. Ferreira, Assessing Cosmological Evidence for Nonmin- imal Coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 081001 (2025), arXiv:2504.07679 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    Ishaket al., Modified gravity constraints from the full shape modeling of clustering measurements from DESI 2024, JCAP09, 053, arXiv:2411.12026 [astro-ph.CO]

    M. Ishaket al., Modified gravity constraints from the full shape modeling of clustering measurements from DESI 2024, JCAP09, 053, arXiv:2411.12026 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2024

  52. [52]

    M.Postolak,Non-minimallycoupledscalarfielddarksec- tor of the universe: in-depth (Einstein frame) case study, arXiv:2505.07456 [gr-qc] (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  53. [53]

    Solà Peracaula, J

    J. Solà Peracaula, J. de Cruz Pérez, and A. Gomez- Valent, Possible signals of vacuum dynamics in the Uni- verse, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.478, 4357 (2018), arXiv:1703.08218 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  54. [54]

    M. A. Sabogal, E. Silva, R. C. Nunes, S. Kumar, E. Di Valentino, and W. Giarè, Quantifying the S8 tension and evidence for interacting dark energy from redshift-space distortion measurements, Phys. Rev. D 110, 123508 (2024), arXiv:2408.12403 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    Li, J.-F

    Y.-H. Li, J.-F. Zhang, and X. Zhang, Exploring the full parameter space for an interacting dark energy model with recent observations including redshift-space distortions: Application of the parametrized post- Friedmann approach, Phys. Rev. D90, 123007 (2014), arXiv:1409.7205 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  56. [56]

    Wei and S

    H. Wei and S. N. Zhang, How to Distinguish Dark Energy and Modified Gravity?, Phys. Rev. D78, 023011 (2008), arXiv:0803.3292 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  57. [57]

    R. J. F. Marcondes, R. C. G. Landim, A. A. Costa, B. Wang, and E. Abdalla, Analytic study of the effect of dark energy-dark matter interaction on the growth of structures, JCAP12, 009, arXiv:1605.05264 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  58. [58]

    N. N. Pooya, Constraints on interacting holographic dark energy models: Implications from background and perturbations data, Phys. Rev. D112, 103506 (2025), arXiv:2510.08875 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    Duniya, D

    D. Duniya, D. Bertacca, and R. Maartens, Clustering of quintessence on horizon scales and its imprint on HI in- tensity mapping, JCAP10, 015, arXiv:1305.4509 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  60. [60]

    Motta, I

    M. Motta, I. Sawicki, I. D. Saltas, L. Amendola, and M. Kunz, Probing Dark Energy through Scale Depen- dence, Phys. Rev. D88, 124035 (2013), arXiv:1305.0008 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  61. [61]

    Scolnicet al., The Pantheon+ Analysis: The Full Data Set and Light-curve Release, Astrophys

    D. Scolnicet al., The Pantheon+ Analysis: The Full Data Set and Light-curve Release, Astrophys. J.938, 113 (2022), arXiv:2112.03863 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  62. [62]

    Broutet al., The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmo- logical Constraints, Astrophys

    D. Broutet al., The Pantheon+ Analysis: Cosmo- logical Constraints, Astrophys. J.938, 110 (2022), arXiv:2202.04077 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    W. L. Matthewson and A. Shafieloo, Star-crossed labours: checking consistency between current super- novae compilations, JCAP01, 064, arXiv:2409.02550 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  64. [64]

    Gómez-Valent and L

    A. Gómez-Valent and L. Amendola,H 0 from cosmic chronometers and Type Ia supernovae, with Gaussian Processes and the novel Weighted Polynomial Regression method, JCAP04, 051, arXiv:1802.01505 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  65. [65]

    Y. Yang, X. Ren, Q. Wang, Z. Lu, D. Zhang, Y.-F. Cai, and E. N. Saridakis, Quintom cosmology and mod- ified gravity after DESI 2024, Sci. Bull.69, 2698 (2024), arXiv:2404.19437 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  66. [66]

    Avila, A

    F. Avila, A. Bernui, A. Bonilla, and R. C. Nunes, Infer- ringS 8(z)andγ(z)with cosmic growth rate measure- ments using machine learning, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 594 (2022), arXiv:2201.07829 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  67. [67]

    Seikel, C

    M. Seikel, C. Clarkson, and M. Smith, Reconstruction of dark energy and expansion dynamics using Gaussian processes, JCAP06, 036, arXiv:1204.2832 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  68. [68]

    Shafieloo, A

    A. Shafieloo, A. G. Kim, and E. V. Linder, Gaussian Process Cosmography, Phys. Rev. D85, 123530 (2012), arXiv:1204.2272 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  69. [69]

    Y. Yang, Q. Wang, C. Li, P. Yuan, X. Ren, E. N. Saridakis, and Y.-F. Cai, Gaussian process reconstruc- tions and model building of quintom dark energy from latest cosmological observations, JCAP08, 050, arXiv:2501.18336 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  70. [70]

    Seikel and C

    M. Seikel and C. Clarkson, Optimising Gaussian pro- cesses for reconstructing dark energy dynamics from su- pernovae, arXiv:1311.6678 [astro-ph.CO] (2013)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  71. [71]

    Foreman-Mackey, D

    D. Foreman-Mackey, D. W. Hogg, D. Lang, and J. Good- man, emcee: The MCMC Hammer, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac.125, 306 (2013), arXiv:1202.3665 [astro-ph.IM]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  72. [72]

    Hwang, B

    S.-g. Hwang, B. L’Huillier, R. E. Keeley, M. J. Jee, and A. Shafieloo, How to use GP: effects of the mean function and hyperparameter selection on Gaussian process re- gression, JCAP02, 014, arXiv:2206.15081 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  73. [73]

    Wang, X.-J

    G.-J. Wang, X.-J. Ma, S.-Y. Li, and J.-Q. Xia, Recon- structing Functions and Estimating Parameters with Ar- tificial Neural Networks: A Test with a Hubble Param- eter and SNe Ia, Astrophys. J. Suppl.246, 13 (2020), arXiv:1910.03636 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  74. [74]

    Dialektopoulos, J

    K. Dialektopoulos, J. L. Said, J. Mifsud, J. Sultana, and K. Z. Adami, Neural network reconstruction of late- time cosmology and null tests, JCAP02(02), 023, arXiv:2111.11462 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  75. [75]

    Sousa-Neto, C

    A. Sousa-Neto, C. Bengaly, J. E. Gonzalez, and J. Al- caniz, Symbolic regression analysis of dynamical dark en- ergy with DESI-DR2 and SN data, Phys. Dark Univ.50, 102108 (2025), arXiv:2502.10506 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  76. [76]

    S. M. Koksbang and A. Heinesen, Model-independent constraints on generalized FLRW consistency re- lations with bootstrap-based symbolic regression, arXiv:2604.05822 [astro-ph.CO] (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  77. [77]

    A. A. Escobal, H. A. P. Macedo, J. F. Jesus, R. C. Nunes, and J. A. S. Lima, Linear Growth of Matter Perturba- tionsProbedbyRedshift-SpaceDistortionsinInteracting Λ(t)CDM Cosmologies, arXiv:2602.11310 [astro-ph.CO] (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  78. [78]

    Barua and S

    S. Barua and S. Desai, Effect of peak absolute magni- tude of Type Ia supernovae and sound horizon values on the Hubble constant using DESI Data Release 1 results, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 470 (2025), arXiv:2412.19240 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  79. [79]

    Benisty, J

    D. Benisty, J. Mifsud, J. Levi Said, and D. Staicova, On the robustness of the constancy of the Supernova absolute magnitude: Non-parametric reconstruction & Bayesian approaches, Phys. Dark Univ.39, 101160 (2023), arXiv:2202.04677 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  80. [80]

    S.Nesseris, G.Pantazis,andL.Perivolaropoulos,Tension and constraints on modified gravity parametrizations of Geff(z)from growth rate and Planck data, Phys. Rev. D 96, 023542 (2017), arXiv:1703.10538 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

Showing first 80 references.