Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Rolling Galileon gravity, a two-function extension of the cubic Galileon with increasing braiding strength, can drive a stable late-time phantom crossing while keeping the screened fifth force healthy in voids, and fits expansion data bette

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 21:03 UTC pith:NBLN74NC

load-bearing objection Genuinely useful theory construction—new invariant parametrization and a clean derivation of the rolling conditions—but the paper's central viability claim is currently undermined by a direct table/text contradiction over stability. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.16395 v1 pith:NBLN74NC submitted 2026-07-17 astro-ph.CO gr-qc

Rolling Galileons: Evolving Braiding Strength for Viable Dark Energy

James Hallam , Krishna Naidoo , Sergi Sirera , Tessa Baker This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO gr-qc
keywords Rolling Galileondark energyphantom crossingbraiding strengthVainshtein screeningintegrated Sachs-Wolfe effectcosmic voidsHorndeski gravity
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 paper introduces Rolling Galileon gravity, a minimal way to break the shift symmetry of the cubic Galileon by letting its coupling coefficients roll with the scalar field. It shows that the full theory space is closed under field redefinitions and is captured by two invariant functions, k(φ) and q(φ), which measure kinetic-to-braiding and quadratic-to-braiding strength. The authors derive analytic conditions for three observations: a late-time crossing of the phantom divide, a positive integrated Sachs-Wolfe signal, and a Vainshtein-screened fifth force that stays real in cosmic voids. These conditions are mutually satisfied by an increasing braiding strength—k decreasing, q positive and decreasing. A minimal k-q model fit to expansion data improves the best fit over ΛCDM by Δχ² ≈ −11.7 while meeting all three viability criteria.

Core claim

Rolling Galileon gravity is the minimal shift-symmetry-breaking extension of the cubic Galileon obtained by promoting its constant coupling coefficients to functions of the scalar field. The resulting three-function Lagrangian is closed under nonlinear field redefinitions, and the physical freedom reduces to two field-redefinition invariants: k(φ), the kinetic-to-braiding strength, and q(φ), the quadratic-to-braiding strength. The paper derives analytic conditions showing that a phantom crossing requires kφ<0, a positive ISW signature requires the lensing potential to decay, and void health requires the Vainshtein ratio χ/δm≤1. The collective profile kφ<0, q>0, qφ<0 corresponds to an increas

What carries the argument

The central object is the invariant pair {k(φ), q(φ)} in the canonical braiding frame, where the braiding coefficient is set to unity. k(φ)=A/B^{2/3} measures the kinetic strength relative to braiding; q(φ)=(C−2B_φ/3)/B^{4/3} measures the quadratic X² strength relative to braiding; both are invariant under scalar-field redefinitions. Together they fully parametrise the closed theory space with action L=−k(φ)X−X□φ+q(φ)X². These two functions carry the argument because every phenomenological condition—phantom crossing, ISW decay, and void health—reduces to algebraic inequalities on k, q, and their φ-derivatives.

Load-bearing premise

The void-health criterion assumes the fifth force in voids is governed purely by Vainshtein screening and by a uniform spherical overdensity model; Rolling Galileons generally screen via a mixture of mechanisms, so if mixed screening changes the sign or existence of the real fifth-force solution in voids, the k-q model's void-health claim would not be established.

What would settle it

Solve the master equation for screening in luminal Horndeski gravity for the k-q model in an underdense profile: if the real fifth-force solution fails or χ/δm exceeds 1 in the model's data-preferred region, the void-health claim collapses. Alternatively, a joint expansion-plus-growth-plus-ISW fit with free neutrino masses that drives the k-q parameters away from the viable region would falsify the model's role as a ΛCDM alternative.

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

If this is right

  • A single rolling braiding strength, with k decreasing and q positive but decreasing, provides a microphysical origin for a stable late-time phantom crossing without a scalar potential.
  • The k-q model remains free of ghost and gradient instabilities and can stay subluminal, while the k-only version briefly becomes superluminal.
  • The void-healthy condition distinguishes the k-q model from earlier asymptotically cubic Galileon models, which fail the χ/δm≤1 bound at low redshift; this makes void-lensing and N-body measurements a discriminating test.
  • The data-preferred histories keep standard ΛCDM background parameters (ωb, ωc, H0≈67–68 km/s/Mpc), placing the modification entirely in the dark-energy sector.
  • Because the posterior for the k-q model satisfies the void bound without being prior-enforced, the result is a genuine prediction of the model, not a selection effect.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If mixed screening changes the fifth force in voids beyond the purely Vainshtein treatment used here, the void-health conclusion could shift; solving the master equation for luminal Horndeski screening in underdense regions would settle it.
  • The preferred histories—phantom at higher redshift, quintessence after the crossing—match the qualitative behaviour argued to ease hints of negative effective neutrino masses, so a joint fit with free Σmν is a natural next test.
  • The invariant parametrisation by {k,q} gives a coordinate-free language for comparing all minimally coupled luminal Horndeski models; models can be classified by the sign of q, which is the deciding factor for void health.
  • If the q∝k² link between invariants is generic for one-function rolling extensions, measuring k and q separately through growth, lensing, and ISW observations would test the minimality of the model.

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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces Rolling Galileon gravity, a shift-symmetry-breaking extension of the cubic Galileon in which the coupling coefficients depend on the scalar field. It argues that the full theory space is closed under field redefinitions and is characterized by two invariant functions k(φ) and q(φ). From these, the authors derive analytic conditions for three phenomenological requirements: a late-time phantom crossing, a positive ISW signature, and absence of a Vainshtein-screening pathology in voids. They then introduce a minimal ansatz, k(φ)=k0/√φ and q(φ)=q0/φ, study its viability on a grid, and fit it to compressed CMB, BAO, and supernova data. The paper claims the k-q model satisfies all three conditions and improves the expansion-history fit by Δχ²_MAP ≈ -11.7 relative to ΛCDM.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper makes a useful contribution by isolating a minimal, closed two-function theory space with evolving braiding strength and by showing that a simple member of this class can simultaneously cross the phantom divide, have a positive ISW sign, and avoid the usual Vainshtein void pathology. The construction of field-redefinition invariants in Sec. II.C is elegant, and the analytic conditions in Sec. III provide clear design principles for future model building. The numerical implementation through Hi-COLA and the MCMC exploration is a valuable proof of concept. However, the current significance is tempered by an internal contradiction in the reported stability diagnostics and by the acknowledged Vainshtein-only nature of the void-health criterion.

major comments (3)
  1. [§IV.D, Table II, Fig. 4] The stability claim is internally inconsistent. The text states: “Throughout the fitted histories, c_s^2 > 0 (37) excludes gradient instabilities and D>0 (38) ensures the absence of ghosts,” with Fig. 4 described as confirming this. Yet Table II reports min c_s^2 = -0.2743^{+0.0133}_{-0.0218} and min D = -0.0064^{+0.0039}_{-0.0042} for the k-only model, and min c_s^2 = -0.1930^{+0.1004}_{-0.1182}, min D = -0.0853^{+0.1035}_{-0.0820} for the k-q model. If these are minima over the MCMC posterior, then the fitted posterior contains cosmologies with gradient instabilities and ghosts, directly undermining the central viability claim. If they are minima over redshift along the MAP history, they contradict Fig. 4. This must be resolved: define precisely what “min” means, and either impose c_s^2>0 and D>0 as hard cuts in the MCMC or report the constrained posterior. The current Table II, as wri
  2. [§III.D and §V] The void-health criterion (55) is derived under two explicit approximations: pure Vainshtein screening and a uniform spherical overdensity, as in Eqs. (51)-(52). The manuscript itself notes that Rolling Galileons “generically have screening of mixed type” and that a full characterization via the master equation is beyond scope. Despite this, the abstract and Table III use the void criterion to distinguish the k-q model as the only model with “Voids ✓”. If mixed screening changes the existence or sign of the real solution for the fifth force in voids, the conclusion that the k-q model is “healthy in voids” is not established. I do not require a full master-equation analysis in this paper, but the claims in the abstract and Table III should be explicitly qualified as “healthy under the Vainshtein-only approximation” until that check is done.
  3. [§IV.D] The positive-ISW condition is imposed a posteriori as a selection criterion rather than included as a likelihood, and the fit uses only expansion-history data (compressed Planck, BAO, supernovae). Therefore the statement that “the ISW stays positive across the posterior by construction” means requirement (ii) is enforced, not predicted. This weakens the appearance of “ISW ✓” in Table III and related claims. Please state explicitly in the abstract and Table III that the positive ISW is an imposed selection, not an independent data-driven success. Relatedly, Table II reports min I = -0.0045 and -0.0035; clarify that the imposed condition is on the integrated S_ISW in Eq. (49), not on the pointwise integrand I(a).
minor comments (5)
  1. [After Fig. 3 caption] There is a stray “Hello there.” in the text after the Fig. 3 caption; it should be removed.
  2. [Eq. (38)] The combination 6X(q+X) in D is notationally confusing and dimensionally odd; either write it as 6qX + 6X^2 or define the shorthand explicitly.
  3. [Table II] Define the derived quantities “min c_s^2” and “min D”: are they minima over redshift at the MAP, or minima over the MCMC posterior? This is essential for interpreting the stability contradiction.
  4. [Table II] The priors differ between the k-only and k-q models (e.g., log10 φini in [-3,1] versus [-10,3]; k0 in [0,6] versus [0,100]). Please state why these different priors were chosen, since they complicate the comparison of Δχ²_MAP between the two models.
  5. [Fig. 4] Specify whether the curves and shaded bands are MAP histories or posterior percentiles, and indicate the redshift range. Also, since the text claims the k-q model “may remain subluminal throughout”, reporting max c_s^2 would make that statement quantitative.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the central derivation is self-contained; the minimal ansatz is openly constructed, the ISW selection is disclosed, and self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's core chain is self-contained. The closed-under-field-redefinition parametrisation is proven in Secs. IIB-IIC via the transformation rules (12)-(14) and the invariants (18), (22); the phantom-crossing, ISW, and void-health conditions are derived algebraically from the action (27) in Secs. IIIB-IIID, yielding the profile (58). The minimal ansatz (59) is explicitly constructed in App. C as a realisation of this profile, so its qualitative behaviour is by design; the paper does not present the ansatz as a data-derived prediction. The positive-ISW condition is transparently imposed in Sec. IVD ('we apply an a posteriori positive-ISW selection enforcing a non-negative ISW strength (49)') and the paper even states the ISW 'stays positive across the posterior by construction' - this is an input selection, not a claimed prediction. The void-health criterion (55), by contrast, is not imposed as a prior, and the k-q posterior remaining below the threshold is a genuine posterior prediction from the external CMB+BAO+SN likelihoods. Self-citations ([10] for the companion pipeline and [47] for the mixed-screening caveat) are instrumental or caveat-level and do not carry the theoretical derivation. Separate, non-circular concerns remain: Table II reports negative min c_s^2 and min D, which appears to contradict the stability claim in Sec. IVD, and the void criterion assumes pure Vainshtein screening; these are correctness/validity risks, not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The new physics input is two arbitrary functions k(φ), q(φ) replacing constants; the minimal ansatz reduces these to four fitted parameters. No new particles or fields; no new conserved quantities. The theory space is a subclass of luminal Horndeski.

free parameters (4)
  • k0 (kinetic-to-braiding amplitude) = k0 = 2.118 (+3.09,-1.60) for k-q model; 1.436 (+0.375,-0.341) for k-only
    Amplitude of k(φ)=k0/√φ; sets initial kinetic-to-braiding strength; fitted and degenerate with φini.
  • q0 (quadratic-to-braiding amplitude) = log10 q0 = 1.867 (+4.66,-2.21) for k-q model
    Amplitude of q(φ)=q0/φ; controls void-health region; weakly constrained.
  • φini (initial field value) = log10 φini = -1.867 (+2.25,-3.17) for k-q model
    Sets where the rolling functions start; posterior has long tail to small values because late-time history is insensitive.
  • finiφ (initial scalar dark-energy fraction) = 0.358 (+0.396,-0.204) for k-q model
    Initial fraction of dark energy in scalar; weakly localised and non-Gaussian.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Tensor modes propagate luminally (cT=c) throughout the theory; the luminal Horndeski subclass is assumed.
    Section I and footnote 2 restrict to luminal subclass; if this fails, the Lagrangian (1) is not the effective low-energy theory.
  • domain assumption The Vainshtein screening ratio and void force use the pure Vainshtein solution; mixed screening is neglected.
    Section III.D and App. E explicitly state 'we remain within the Vainshtein-only limit'; void-health conclusion depends on this.
  • domain assumption Linear perturbation results use subhorizon quasistatic and weak-field approximations, with no effective scalar mass parametrically larger than H.
    Footnote 4 in Sec. III.C lists these assumptions; the µ = Σ derivation (46) and ISW integral (49) rest on them.
  • domain assumption The scalar field normalization patch B > 0 is chosen; the B < 0 patch is analogous but B = 0 is singular in this coordinate.
    Sec. II.C defines the canonical braiding frame using B^{1/3}; the analysis covers only the B > 0 patch.
  • domain assumption The background evolution is FLRW and matter is minimally coupled; no dark matter-baryon-scalar coupling.
    Eqs. (2), (30) and Sec. II.A.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 22660 in / 12652 out tokens · 114786 ms · 2026-08-01T21:03:42.247510+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Motivated by growing observational indications that dark energy may be dynamical, we introduce Rolling Galileon gravity: a minimal shift-symmetry-breaking extension of the cubic Galileon in which the coupling coefficients are allowed to vary, giving rise to an evolving braiding strength. The full theory space, shown to be closed under field redefinitions, is characterised by two functions. We derive analytical conditions to satisfy three phenomenological requirements: i) a phantom-crossing equation of state at late times, ii) a positive integrated Sachs-Wolfe signature, and iii) absence of pathologies in the screened scalar force in cosmic voids. We show that these conditions are collectively satisfied by an increasing braiding strength relative to the kinetic sector. A Bayesian analysis of minimal Rolling Galileon models finds that they can satisfy the viability requirements i)-iii) whilst providing an acceptable fit to expansion-history data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.16395 by James Hallam, Krishna Naidoo, Sergi Sirera, Tessa Baker.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Carpet plots of cosmological viability across [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Marginalised posterior constraints for the two minimal Rolling Galileon models fitted to the joint CMB+BAO+SN data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Posterior predictive viability diagnostics (see Sec. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Perturbative stability check of the scalar field on an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Posterior background evolution for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Posterior evolution of the scalar field and its first derivative, together with the functions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Marginalised model-independent posterior constraints for the two minimal RG models fitted to the joint CMB+BAO+SN [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Phantom-divide crossing and suppressed structure growth in kinetically braided dark energy with momentum exchange

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    A linearly stable kinetic-braiding dark-energy model with CDM momentum exchange realizes upward phantom-divide crossing and weak CDM gravitational clustering, altering matter and CMB spectra.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Let us momentarily suppress the quadratic term and consider only the generalised cubic Galileon operators

    Generalised Kinetic-to-Braiding Strength We begin with the natural generalisation of the cubic Galileon kinetic-to-braiding constant. Let us momentarily suppress the quadratic term and consider only the generalised cubic Galileon operators. Using(12) and (13), we have Lφ⊃− ˜AX− ˜BX□φ, =−Aϕ 2 φX−Bϕ 3 φX□φ,(15) where recall that the dependencies for tilded ...

  2. [2]

    Quadratic-to-Braiding Strength We now construct a second invariant to complete the characterisation of the closed theory space. This is associated with the new quadratic operatorX2, whose coefficient transforms according to (14), Lφ⊃ ˜CX 2, = [ Cϕ4 φ + 2Bϕ2 φϕφφ ] X2.(19) Thus, the bare coefficient does not transform homoge- neously. Part of the rolling b...

  3. [3]

    A subclass of Rolling Galileons is obtained by demand- ing that the theory asymptote to this cubic Galileon point at early times

    The Cubic Galileon Point and its Asymptotic Subclass Within the Rolling Galileon theory space, the shift- symmetric cubic Galileon is the special point at which the kinetic-to-braiding strength is constant and the quadratic- to-braiding strength vanishes: k(φ) =k 0, q(φ) = 0,(23) wherek 0 is the same constant appearing in (7). A subclass of Rolling Galile...

  4. [4]

    crosses the phantom divide atz <1(see Sec. IIIB)

  5. [5]

    maintains a positive ISW signature (see Sec. IIIC)

  6. [6]

    has a healthy modified force in voids (see Sec. IIID). We identify the cosmologically viable region as the simultaneous intersection of all three criteria. We present the resulting classification as acarpet plot,6 identifying the regions selected by each individual diagnostic and their mutual overlap across several slices ofφini. The results are shown in ...

    1930

  7. [7]

    General Frame Transformations The invariant pair{k,q} may be extracted from any scalar-field frame. Given the general action Lϕ =−A(ϕ)X−B(ϕ)X□ϕ+C(ϕ)X 2,(A1) the invariants, expressed initially as functions of the original field coordinateϕ, are k(ϕ) = A(ϕ) B(ϕ)2/3, q(ϕ) = C(ϕ)− 2 3Bϕ(ϕ) B(ϕ)4/3 .(A2) They may then be expressed in the canonical braiding fr...

  8. [8]

    GrowingG(φ) Thefirstmodelintroducedin[ 10], theGrowingG model, reads Lϕ =−k 1X−g 31(1 +cg3ϕ)X□ϕ.(A4) Comparing with the general action (A1) gives A(ϕ) =k 1, B(ϕ) =g 31(1 +cg3ϕ), C(ϕ) = 0,(A5) 14 and henceBϕ =g 31cg3. Eq. (A2) therefore gives k(ϕ) = k1 [g31(1 +cg3ϕ)]2/3,(A6) q(ϕ) =− 2cg3 3g1/3 31 (1 +cg3ϕ)4/3 .(A7) To pass to the canonical braiding frame, ...

  9. [9]

    Substitution therefore gives ˜k(φ) =k 0e−φ0φ,˜q(φ) = 0,(A16) wherek 0 :=k 1g−2/3 31 andφ 0 :=c kg1/3 31

    DecayingK(φ) The second model introduced in [10], the decayingK model, is given by Lϕ =−k 1e−ckϕX−g 31X□ϕ.(A12) Thus A(ϕ) =k 1e−ckϕ, B(ϕ) =g 31, C(ϕ) = 0.(A13) SinceB ϕ = 0, no quadratic coefficient is induced, and k(ϕ) = k1 g2/3 31 e−ckϕ, q(ϕ) = 0.(A14) BecauseB isconstant, thefieldtransformationissimply dφ dϕ =g 1/3 31 =⇒φ=g 1/3 31 ϕ,(A15) where the fie...

  10. [10]

    In both cases, with0<φ ini≪ 1, k(φ)decreases monotonically from a positive constant when the field starts rolling

    Comparison Equations (A11) and (A16) tell us both the similarities and differences between the two ACG models studied in [10]. In both cases, with0<φ ini≪ 1, k(φ)decreases monotonically from a positive constant when the field starts rolling. With a square-root rational decay for GrowingG and exponential decay for DecayingK, they admit qualitatively simila...

  11. [11]

    Construction in the Canonical Kinetic Frame In the canonical kinetic frame, given by(B4), the shift- symmetric cubic Galileon corresponds to the special point {g(ψ) = g0,h (ψ) = 0}. The simplest extension of this is to promoteg0 to a function of the field and include a constant quadratic coefficienth0,{g(ψ),h (ψ) = h0}, giving Lψ =−X−g(ψ)X□ψ+h 0X 2.(C1) H...

  12. [12]

    Specifying the Rolling Profile It still remains to specify that freedom. The sim- plest shift-symmetry breaking extension of the constant- coupling theory is a linear expansion about the cubic Galileon pointg 0, g(ψ) =g 0 +g 1ψ.(C2) However, we may eliminateg0 through a redefinition of the field. Defining ˜ψ :=ψ+ g0 g1 ,(C3) the derivative terms remain in...

  13. [13]

    Transformation to the Canonical Braiding Frame The canonical braiding frame functions are related to the canonical kinetic functions via(B5) and (B6). Since h(ψ) = h0, the rolling profiles of{k,q} are set by the rolling ofg(ψ)(C6) alone, k(ψ) = 1 (g1ψ)2/3, q(ψ) = ( k0− 2 3g1 ) k(ψ)2.(C7) We thus find that the minimal rolling model links the two canonical ...

  14. [14]

    A potential, however, is not a coefficient, and so transforms trivially

    Theory Space The operator coefficientsA, B and C mix under field redefinitions of the main text, and it is for this reason that the physical content is carried by the invariant pair {k,q}. A potential, however, is not a coefficient, and so transforms trivially. Under ϕ = ϕ(φ), its value is invariant, ˜V(φ) =V(ϕ(φ)),(E1) and so may be added unambiguously i...

  15. [15]

    Phenomenology Because the potential carries no X-dependence, it leaves the braiding and the kinetic derivative structure untouched. On the FLRW background(30), it shifts the scalar energy density and pressure byρφ→ρ φ +V and pφ→p φ−V respectively, so that their sum is unchanged, ρφ +pφ = 2X ( −k+ 2qX+ 3H ˙φ− ¨φ ) .(E3) The equation of motion is subsequent...

  16. [16]

    Calderon, K

    R. Calderon, K. Lodha, A. Shafieloo, E. Linder, W. Sohn, et al.,DESI 2024: reconstructing dark energy using crossing statistics with DESI DR1 BAO data, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2024(10), 048

    2024

  17. [17]

    Abdul Karimet al.(DESI),DESI DR2 results

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    DES Collaboration,Constraints on Dynamical Dark Energy from Multiple Probes in the Full Dark Energy Survey(2026), arXiv:2605.27221 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    R. Chen, J. M. Cline, V. Muralidharan, and B. Salewicz, Quintessential dark energy crossing the phantom divide (2025), arXiv:2508.19101 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Goh and A

    L. Goh and A. Taylor,Phantom crossing with quintom models, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society544, 3142 (2025)

    2025

  21. [21]

    Hallam and J

    J. Hallam and J. Magueijo,Bimodular Gravity: Vacuum Evolution with a Frame-Dependent Phantom Crossing (2025), arXiv:2511.13562 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Nojiri, S

    S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and V. K. Oikonomou,Phantom Crossing and Oscillating Dark Energy withF (R)Gravity (2025), arXiv:2506.21010 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Y. Yang, Q. Wang, X. Ren, E. N. Saridakis, and Y.-F. Cai, Modified Gravity Realizations of Quintom Dark Energy after DESI DR2, The Astrophysical Journal988, 123 (2025)

    2025

  24. [24]

    S. L. Guedezounme, B. R. Dinda, and R. Maartens,Phan- tom crossing or dark interaction?, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2026(01), 062

  25. [25]

    Naidoo, J

    K. Naidoo, J. Hallam, T. Baker, and S. Sirera,Con- straints on Horndeski Gravity with Phantom Crossing, in preparation (2026)

    2026

  26. [26]

    G. W. Horndeski,Second-order scalar-tensor field equa- tions in a four-dimensional space, Int. J. Theor. Phys.10, 363 (1974)

    1974

  27. [27]

    LIGO,Gravitational Waves and Gamma-Rays from a Binary Neutron Star Merger: GW170817 and GRB 170817A, The Astrophysical Journal Letters848, L13 (2017)

    2017

  28. [28]

    Baker, E

    T. Baker, E. Bellini, P. G. Ferreira, M. Lagos, J. Noller, et al.,Strong constraints on cosmological gravity from GW170817 and GRB 170817A, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 251301 (2017), arXiv:1710.06394 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  29. [29]

    Creminelli and F

    P. Creminelli and F. Vernizzi,Dark Energy after GW170817 and GRB170817A, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 251302 (2017), arXiv:1710.05877 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  30. [30]

    Armendariz-Picon, V

    C. Armendariz-Picon, V. F. Mukhanov, and P. J. Stein- hardt,A Dynamical solution to the problem of a small cosmological constant and late time cosmic acceleration, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 4438 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/0004134

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  31. [31]

    A.Vikman,Can dark energy evolve to the phantom?,Phys- ical Review D71, 10.1103/physrevd.71.023515 (2005)

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.71.023515 2005

  32. [32]

    Brans and R

    C. Brans and R. H. Dicke,Mach’s principle and a 18 relativistic theory of gravitation, Phys. Rev.124, 925 (1961)

    1961

  33. [33]

    Perrotta, C

    F. Perrotta, C. Baccigalupi, and S. Matarrese,Extended quintessence, Phys. Rev. D61, 023507 (1999), arXiv:astro- ph/9906066

    arXiv 1999

  34. [34]

    Perivolaropoulos,Crossing the phantom divide barrier with scalar tensor theories, JCAP10, 001, arXiv:astro- ph/0504582

    L. Perivolaropoulos,Crossing the phantom divide barrier with scalar tensor theories, JCAP10, 001, arXiv:astro- ph/0504582

    arXiv

  35. [35]

    Deffayet, O

    C. Deffayet, O. Pujolàs, I. Sawicki, and A. Vikman, Imperfect dark energy from kinetic gravity braiding, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2010 (10), 026

  36. [36]

    Pujolas, I

    O. Pujolas, I. Sawicki, and A. Vikman,The Imperfect Fluid behind Kinetic Gravity Braiding, JHEP11, 156, arXiv:1103.5360 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  37. [37]

    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

  38. [38]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    W. J. Wolf, C. García-García, D. J. Bartlett, and P. G. Ferreira,Scant evidence for thawing quintessence, Phys. Rev. D110, 083528 (2024), arXiv:2408.17318 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    Guet al.,Dynamical Dark Energy in light of the DESI DR2 Baryonic Acoustic Oscillations Measurements, (2025), arXiv:2504.06118 [astro-ph.CO]

    G. Guet al.,Dynamical Dark Energy in light of the DESI DR2 Baryonic Acoustic Oscillations Measurements, (2025), arXiv:2504.06118 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    E. V. Linder,Uplifting, Depressing, and Tilting Dark Energy, (2025), arXiv:2506.02122 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    García-García, P

    C. García-García, P. G. Ferreira, and W. J. Wolf,The Status of Single Scalar Field Dark Energy, (2026), arXiv:2607.07777 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  43. [43]

    Cataneo and K

    M. Cataneo and K. Koyama,Non-parametric exploration of minimally coupled gravity with phantom crossing, (2025), arXiv:2512.13691 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    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

  45. [45]

    Nicolis, R

    A. Nicolis, R. Rattazzi, and E. Trincherini,Galileon as a local modification of gravity, Physical Review D79, 10.1103/physrevd.79.064036 (2009)

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.064036 2009

  46. [46]

    Deffayet, G

    C. Deffayet, G. Esposito-Farese, and A. Vikman,Co- variant Galileon, Phys. Rev. D79, 084003 (2009), arXiv:0901.1314 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  47. [47]

    Traykova, E

    D. Traykova, E. Bellini, P. G. Ferreira, C. García-García, J. Noller,et al.,Theoretical priors in scalar-tensor cosmologies: Shift-symmetric Horndeski models, Physical Review D104, 10.1103/physrevd.104.083502 (2021)

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.083502 2021

  48. [48]

    E. V. Linder,Cosmology after Phantom Crossing by Horn- deski Gravity, (2025), arXiv:2512.03139 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    W. J. Wolf, P. G. Ferreira, and C. García-García,Cos- mological constraints on Galileon dark energy with broken shift symmetry, Physical Review D113, 10.1103/bxvj- bsv1 (2026)

    work page doi:10.1103/bxvj- 2026

  50. [50]

    de Rham and S

    C. de Rham and S. Melville,Gravitational Rainbows: LIGO and Dark Energy at its Cutoff, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 221101 (2018), arXiv:1806.09417 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  51. [51]

    Harry and J

    I. Harry and J. Noller,Probing the speed of gravity with LVK, LISA, and joint observations, Gen. Rel. Grav.54, 133 (2022), arXiv:2207.10096 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  52. [52]

    Bakeret al.,Measuring the propagation speed of gravitational waves with LISA, (2022), arXiv:2203.00566 [gr-qc]

    T. Bakeret al.,Measuring the propagation speed of gravitational waves with LISA, (2022), arXiv:2203.00566 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  53. [53]

    Baker, E

    T. Baker, E. Barausse, A. Chen, C. de Rham, M. Pieroni, and G. Tasinato,Testing gravitational wave propagation with multiband detections, JCAP03, 044, arXiv:2209.14398 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  54. [54]

    Sirera and J

    S. Sirera and J. Noller,Testing the speed of gravity with black hole ringdowns, Phys. Rev. D107, 124054 (2023), arXiv:2301.10272 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    Atkins, A

    B. Atkins, A. Malhotra, and G. Tasinato,Novel probe of graviton dispersion relations at nanohertz frequencies, Phys. Rev. D110, 124018 (2024), arXiv:2408.10122 [gr- qc]

    arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    Kobayashi, S

    H. Kobayashi, S. Mukohyama, J. Noller, S. Sirera, K. Takahashi, and V. Yingcharoenrat,Inverting no-hair theorems: How requiring general relativity solutions restricts scalar-tensor theories, Phys. Rev. D111, 124022 (2025), arXiv:2503.05651 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    Appleby and E

    S. Appleby and E. V. Linder,The Paths of Gravity in Galileon Cosmology, JCAP03, 043, arXiv:1112.1981 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1981

  58. [58]

    G. Goon, K. Hinterbichler, A. Joyce, and M. Trodden, Aspects of Galileon non-renormalization, Journal of High Energy Physics2016, 10.1007/jhep11(2016)100 (2016)

    doi:10.1007/jhep11(2016)100 2016

  59. [59]

    B. S. Wright, A. Sen Gupta, T. Baker, G. Valogiannis, and B. Fiorini (LSST Dark Energy Science),Hi-COLA: fast, approximate simulations of structure formation in Horndeski gravity, JCAP03, 040, arXiv:2209.01666 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  60. [60]

    A. I. Vainshtein,To the problem of nonvanishing gravita- tion mass, Phys. Lett. B39, 393 (1972)

    1972

  61. [61]

    Babichev and C

    E. Babichev and C. Deffayet,An introduction to the Vainshtein mechanism, Class. Quant. Grav.30, 184001 (2013), arXiv:1304.7240 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  62. [62]

    Sirera, T

    S. Sirera, T. Baker, J. Hallam, and K. Naidoo,A Master Equation for Screening in Luminal Horndeski Gravity, (2026), arXiv:2605.04154 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  63. [63]

    Smulders and J

    L. Smulders and J. Noller,Stable black hole solutions with cosmological hair, (2026), arXiv:2603.22398 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  64. [64]

    Smulders, J

    L. Smulders, J. Noller, and S. Sirera,Testing Dark Energy with Black Hole Ringdown, (2026), arXiv:2603.23634 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  65. [65]

    Tsujikawa,Crossing the phantom divide in scalar-tensor and vector-tensor theories, (2025), arXiv:2508.17231 [astro-ph.CO]

    S. Tsujikawa,Crossing the phantom divide in scalar-tensor and vector-tensor theories, (2025), arXiv:2508.17231 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    P. Brax, C. Burrage, A.-C. Davis, and G. Gubitosi, Cosmological Tests of Coupled Galileons, JCAP03, 028, arXiv:1411.7621 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  67. [67]

    Kobayashi,Horndeski theory and beyond: a review, Rept

    T. Kobayashi,Horndeski theory and beyond: a review, Rept. Prog. Phys.82, 086901 (2019), arXiv:1901.07183 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  68. [68]

    Bellini and I

    E. Bellini and I. Sawicki,Maximal freedom at minimum cost: linear large-scale structure in general modifications of gravity, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2014(07), 050

    2014

  69. [69]

    R. K. Sachs and A. M. Wolfe,Perturbations of a Cosmo- logical Model and Angular Variations of the Microwave Background, Astrophys. J.147, 73 (1967)

    1967

  70. [70]

    J. Renk, M. Zumalacárregui, F. Montanari, and A. Bar- reira,Galileon gravity in light of ISW, CMB, BAO and H0 data, JCAP10, 020, arXiv:1707.02263 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  71. [71]

    Seraille, J

    E. Seraille, J. Noller, and B. D. Sherwin,Constraining dark energy with the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect, Phys. 19 Rev. D110, 123525 (2024), arXiv:2401.06221 [astro- ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  72. [72]

    Boisseau, G

    B. Boisseau, G. Esposito-Farese, D. Polarski, and A. A. Starobinsky,Reconstruction of a scalar tensor theory of gravity in an accelerating universe, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 2236 (2000), arXiv:gr-qc/0001066

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  73. [73]

    Esposito-Farese and D

    G. Esposito-Farese and D. Polarski,Scalar tensor gravity in an accelerating universe, Phys. Rev. D63, 063504 (2001), arXiv:gr-qc/0009034

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  74. [74]

    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

  75. [75]

    Tsujikawa,Matter density perturbations and effective gravitational constant in modified gravity models of dark energy, Phys

    S. Tsujikawa,Matter density perturbations and effective gravitational constant in modified gravity models of dark energy, Phys. Rev. D76, 023514 (2007), arXiv:0705.1032 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  76. [76]

    Fidler, T

    C. Fidler, T. Tram, C. Rampf, R. Crittenden, K. Koyama, and D. Wands,General relativistic weak-field limit and Newtonian N-body simulations, JCAP12, 022, arXiv:1708.07769 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  77. [77]

    Baker, P

    T. Baker, P. G. Ferreira, C. D. Leonard, and M. Motta, New Gravitational Scales in Cosmological Surveys, Phys. Rev. D90, 124030 (2014), arXiv:1409.8284 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  78. [78]

    C. M. Will,The Confrontation between General Rela- tivity and Experiment, Living Rev. Rel.17, 4 (2014), arXiv:1403.7377 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  79. [79]

    Kimura, T

    R. Kimura, T. Kobayashi, and K. Yamamoto,Vainshtein screening in a cosmological background in the most general second-order scalar-tensor theory, Phys. Rev. D85, 024023 (2012), arXiv:1111.6749 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  80. [80]

    Baker, J

    T. Baker, J. Clampitt, B. Jain, and M. Trodden,Void Lensing as a Test of Gravity, Phys. Rev. D98, 023511 (2018), arXiv:1803.07533 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

Showing first 80 references.