Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 42 references

Kaniadakis entropy mildly reshapes ghost dark energy evolution and pulls the model closer to 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

2026-07-30 18:42 UTC pith:OCAAL2I2

load-bearing objection Clean incremental combo of interacting GDE with Kaniadakis-corrected Friedmann equations; math holds under the small-λ truncation, effects are mild, classical instability remains. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.23564 v1 pith:OCAAL2I2 submitted 2026-07-26 gr-qc

Ghost Dark Energy in the Modified Kaniadakis Cosmology

A. Dezhakam , A. Sheykhi , A. Dehyadegari This is my paper
classification gr-qc
keywords ghost dark energyKaniadakis entropymodified Friedmann equationsinteracting dark energysquared sound speedstatefinder diagnosticapparent horizon thermodynamics
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.

This paper puts ghost dark energy—an energy density proportional to the Hubble rate that comes from QCD vacuum contributions—into a cosmology whose Friedmann equations are corrected by Kaniadakis entropy. The correction is a single parameter λ that appears after the first law of thermodynamics is applied at the apparent horizon. Numerical evolution of a flat universe with pressureless matter and an interacting ghost component shows that λ only mildly changes the dark-energy equation of state, slightly advances the onset of cosmic acceleration, and reduces present-day deviations from the ΛCDM fixed point in the statefinder plane. The model remains classically unstable (negative squared sound speed), yet larger λ makes that instability less severe. The result matters because it tests whether a simple entropy deformation can reconcile a theoretically motivated dark-energy candidate with late-time observations without introducing new fields.

Core claim

When interacting ghost dark energy evolves inside the Kaniadakis-corrected flat Friedmann equations, the deformation parameter λ produces only mild shifts in the equation-of-state and deceleration histories, moderates the classical instability measured by the squared sound speed, and drives the statefinder trajectory toward the ΛCDM point {r,s}={1,0} with smaller present-day deviations as λ grows.

What carries the argument

The truncated modified evolution system obtained from the Kaniadakis-corrected Friedmann equation H² − α H⁻² = (8πG/3)ρ_cr after the small-λ expansion (1 + λ Ω_D/H³)⁻¹ ≈ (1 − λ Ω_D/H³); this system supplies closed expressions for w_D, q, Ω_D′ and v_s² that are integrated numerically.

Load-bearing premise

The whole dynamical analysis rests on a small-λ truncation of the corrected continuity and Friedmann equations, together with a fixed phenomenological interaction and a hand-chosen value of the ghost density prefactor; if that expansion or the ghost density form itself fails inside the corrected theory, the reported shifts disappear.

What would settle it

A joint fit of supernova, BAO and CMB distance data that either rules out or tightly bounds the Kaniadakis parameter λ_r while requiring the model’s predicted transition redshift and present-day w_D to match observations would falsify the claimed mild, observationally viable corrections.

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

If this is right

  • Larger Kaniadakis λ reduces present-day statefinder distance from ΛCDM while still permitting a late-time phantom crossing when interaction is present.
  • The deceleration-to-acceleration transition redshift increases mildly with both λ and the interaction strength b².
  • Classical instability (v_s² < 0) persists for all explored parameters but becomes less severe as λ grows and more severe as b² grows.
  • At late times the model asymptotes to de Sitter expansion (q → −1) independently of λ.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because the same entropy correction already generates an effective cosmological-constant term, the residual ghost component may become observationally redundant once λ is allowed to float freely against data.
  • A next natural test is whether the growth of linear density perturbations remains consistent with large-scale-structure surveys once the moderated but still negative sound speed is retained.
  • If the small-λ truncation is abandoned, the exact (1 + λ Ω_D/H³) factors could reverse the sign of the stability trend reported here.

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 / 7 minor

Summary. The authors derive modified Friedmann equations by applying the first law of thermodynamics at the FRW apparent horizon with the expanded Kaniadakis entropy, following the Cai–Kim route and prior work [32], obtaining H² − αH⁻² = (8πG/3)ρ for the flat case. They then place ghost dark energy (ρ_D = βH) with a phenomenological interaction Q = 3b²Hρ_cr in this framework, derive evolution equations for Ω_D, w_D, q, v_s², and the statefinder pair {r,s}, and integrate them numerically for λ_r = λ/H_0³ ∈ {0, 0.05, 0.1}. Reported results: the Kaniadakis correction mildly affects w_D, shifts the deceleration–acceleration transition, keeps v_s² negative (less so at larger λ), and drives {r,s} toward {1,0} with smaller present-day deviations as λ increases. The algebra from Eq. (21) through Eq. (27) checks out on re-derivation — the conversion to the correction factor (1+λΩ_D/H³)⁻¹ is exact, Eq. (25) is exact, and Eq. (27) is the untruncated constraint. The load-bearing weakness is elsewhere: every phenomenological formula (Eqs. 24, 26, 29, 32, 34–35) inherits the first-order truncation (1+λΩ_D/H³)⁻¹ → (1−λΩ_D/H³) of Eq. (23), whose neglected O(x²) terms are never bounded, while the headline claims are precisely the first-order λ-trends.

Significance. If the truncation issue is resolved and the λ-trends survive, the paper provides a correct, clearly presented worked example of GDE dynamics in Kaniadakis-entropy cosmology, with the useful feature that exact (untruncated) forms of the key relations (Eqs. 22, 25, 27) are already in the manuscript, so the required revision is technically straightforward. The λ→0 limits are checked against the standard GDE results of [17]. The contribution is nonetheless incremental: it adds one more entry to a crowded literature of entropy-corrected dark-energy phenomenology, fixes its free parameters (β, Ω_D0, b², λ_r) by hand, and offers no confrontation with data or new falsifiable prediction. The claim that larger λ 'helps reconcile GDE models with observational constraints' (§V) is not supported by any observable comparison.

major comments (3)
  1. [§III, Eq. (22)→(23); §IV] All phenomenology (Eqs. (24), (26), (29), (32), (34)-(35)) is built on the first-order replacement (1+λΩ_D/H³)^{-1} → (1−λΩ_D/H³) made in Eq. (22)→(23). The neglected terms are O(x²) with x=λΩ_D/H³. §IV merely asserts that the chosen λ_r values are 'consistent with the small deviation approximation'; this is never demonstrated. At z=0, λ_r=0.1 gives x≈0.069 and x²≈5×10⁻³ against reported first-order effects of a few percent — marginal. Worse, x grows at late times (Ω_D→1, H<H_0), and the λ-spread in v_s² in Fig. 4 (~0.02–0.04) is of the same order as x² there. The abstract's directional claims ('instability moderated for larger λ', 'deviations decreasing as λ increases') therefore rest on an uncontrolled approximation. Since Eq. (22) is already exact, the cleanest fix is to propagate the exact factor and re-run Figs. 1-6; alternatively, provide an explicit error bound showing O(x²) terms
  2. [§III–IV, Eqs. (26)+(27)] The integrated system combines the truncated evolution law (26) with the exact modified-Friedmann constraint (27). This hybrid is internally inconsistent in order-counting: H entering Eq. (26) satisfies the exact relation, while the dynamics of Ω_D assumes the truncated one. A consistent treatment should either use exact Eq. (22) together with (27) throughout, or expand the constraint to the same O(λ) order. The authors should demonstrate explicitly that the chosen prescription reproduces the exact-factor results over the plotted range z∈[−1,3] for the largest λ_r=0.1; without this, the quantitative statements (transition-redshift shifts, present-day w_D values) cannot be trusted at face value.
  3. [§IV.A–B, Eqs. (32), (34)–(35)] Eq. (32) and Eqs. (34)–(35) appear to be obtained by symbolically differentiating the truncated factor (1−λΩ_D/H³) as-is, which generates mixed-order terms (e.g. the squared denominator (2−Ω_D+λΩ_D²/H³)² contains O(λ²) pieces when expanded, while other λ-terms are kept only to O(λ)). If the authors retain the truncation, the final expressions should be re-expanded consistently to O(λ) so that the stability and statefinder trends are not contaminated by partial higher-order contributions. This matters most for the v_s² 'moderation' claim, where the effect size is smallest.
minor comments (7)
  1. [§III, after Eq. (19)] ρ_cr is used for ρ_m+ρ_D (total fluid density), which collides with the standard meaning of critical density. Renaming or an explicit definition at first use would avoid confusion.
  2. [§II–III, Eqs. (16)–(17)] The cosmological constant Λ entering as an integration constant in Eq. (16) is silently dropped when ρ_D is introduced in Eq. (17); yet §V claims the modification 'naturally gives rise to an effective cosmological constant.' Please state explicitly whether Λ=0 is assumed once GDE is added.
  3. [§IV, first paragraph] β = 0.25H_0/(πG) and Ω_D0=0.69 are fixed by hand with no justification or sensitivity check. Given the QCD motivation, β should be related to Λ³_QCD, and a sentence on the robustness of the λ-trends to these choices would strengthen the numerical section.
  4. [§IV.A, Eq. (30)] In an interacting two-component fluid the physically relevant diagnostic is the DE rest-frame sound speed; the adiabatic v_s²=dp_D/dρ_cr used here is common in the GDE literature but the conclusion 'generally unstable against perturbations' should be qualified accordingly.
  5. [§IV] Numerical values of λ_r (0, 0.05, 0.1) appear only in figure legends; state them in the text.
  6. [Fig. 6 caption] Caption reads 'Plot of S vs z' — should be lowercase s. Also in Fig. 4 (lower panel) the claim that the b²=0 case 'approaches the stability boundary' at late times should be quantified.
  7. [§V] Fig. 2 shows w_D(0)≈−0.75…−0.9, in tension with current w_0 constraints; and the §V statement that smaller statefinder deviations 'may help reconcile GDE models with observational constraints' conflates proximity to the ΛCDM statefinder point with observational viability. This claim should be tempered absent any data comparison.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

No meaningful circularity: GDE dynamics are forward-integrated from external inputs plus a re-derived Kaniadakis–Friedmann setup; self-citation of the framework is ordinary inheritance, not a forced prediction.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. II, Eqs. (15)–(16) and citation [32]]
    "Integrating the above relation and using the connection between the Hubble parameter and the apparent horizon radius (2), the modified Friedmann equation for a spatially flat universe takes the following form [32] H² − αH⁻² = 8πG/3 (ρ + ρ_Λ)"

    The modified Friedmann backbone is justified by citation to overlapping-author prior work [32] (Sheykhi). This supplies the λ-correction that all later numerics depend on. It is ordinary framework inheritance, not a uniqueness claim or a fit relabeled as prediction; the GDE evolution equations and figures are still new forward calculations on top of that backbone, so the circularity is minor and not load-bearing for the reported λ-trends.

full rationale

The paper’s load-bearing chain is: (i) Kaniadakis entropy on the apparent horizon → modified Friedmann equation (Sec. II, Eqs. 11–16), reproduced in-text with details deferred to overlapping-author Ref. [32]; (ii) external GDE density ρ_D=βH and phenomenological Q=3b²Hρ_cr (Sec. III); (iii) algebraic derivation of w_D, Ω_D', q, v_s², and statefinders under a stated small-λ truncation (Eqs. 22–35); (iv) numerical forward integration for fixed Ω_D0, β, λ_r, b² (Sec. IV). Nothing in (iii)–(iv) is fitted to the quantities later called ‘results,’ nor is any uniqueness theorem used to forbid alternatives. The only self-touch is inheritance of the Kaniadakis–Friedmann background from [32] (Sheykhi), which is normal framework reuse and is partially re-derived on-page. Approximation validity of the O(λ) truncation is a correctness concern, not circularity. Score 1 for that minor non-forcing self-citation; central GDE phenomenology is independent content.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The load-bearing claim rests on the thermodynamic gravity conjecture with Kaniadakis horizon entropy, the QCD-motivated GDE density ρ_D=βH, a phenomenological interaction, a small-λ truncation, and several hand-chosen present-day parameters. No new fundamental entity is introduced; novelty is in the coupling of existing pieces.

free parameters (4)
  • λ_r = λ/H_0³ (dimensionless Kaniadakis correction) = 0, 0.05, 0.1 (chosen)
    Scanned by hand over {0, 0.05, 0.1}; controls all reported mild shifts and stability moderation. Not fitted to data.
  • b² (matter–DE interaction coupling) = 0–0.03 (chosen)
    Phenomenological strength in Q=3b² H ρ_cr; scanned over {0, 0.01, 0.02, 0.03} and drives phantom crossing and v_s² trends.
  • Ω_D0 = 0.69
    Present dark-energy density parameter fixed to 0.69 for all numerical runs.
  • β (GDE normalization) = 0.25 H_0/(πG)
    Sets ρ_D=βH; fixed to 0.25 H_0/(πG) without observational fit in this work.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption First law dE=T_h dS_h + W dV_h at the FRW apparent horizon yields the correct gravitational dynamics when S_h is Kaniadakis entropy.
    Section II; underpins the modified Friedmann equation (16).
  • domain assumption Kaniadakis horizon entropy S_K=(1/K)sinh(K S) with S=A/4G, expanded for K≪1 to S+(K²/6)S³.
    Eqs. (11)–(14); defines the correction parameter α and thus λ.
  • domain assumption Ghost dark energy density retains the form ρ_D=βH inside the entropy-corrected cosmology.
    Eq. (20), imported from QCD-ghost literature [17]; never re-derived in the modified setup.
  • ad hoc to paper Matter–DE energy exchange is Q=3b² H ρ_cr with constant b².
    Section III; standard phenomenological choice, not derived from microphysics.
  • ad hoc to paper Small-λ truncation (1+λ Ω_D/H³)^{-1}≈(1−λ Ω_D/H³) is adequate for the full dynamical and stability analysis.
    Eqs. (22)–(23) and all later formulas for w_D, q, Ω_D', v_s², r, s.
  • domain assumption Spatially flat FRW universe with pressureless matter and a perfect-fluid stress tensor.
    Sections II–III; standard cosmological background.

pith-pipeline@v1.2.0-grok45-kimik3 · 16421 in / 3811 out tokens · 102036 ms · 2026-07-30T18:42:04.008556+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate ghost dark energy (GDE) in a cosmological framework derived from Kaniadakis entropy. By applying the first law of thermodynamics to the FRW apparent horizon, we obtain modified Friedmann equations that include a correction term characterized by the Kaniadakis parameter $\lambda$. We then study the evolution of a flat universe containing pressureless matter and interacting GDE within this modified gravity setup. Our numerical analysis reveals that the Kaniadakis correction mildly affects the dark energy equation of state and shifts the transition to cosmic acceleration. Stability analysis via the squared sound speed shows the model remains generally unstable, though the instability is moderated for larger $\lambda$. Statefinder diagnostics indicate that the model approaches the $\Lambda$CDM fixed point in the future, with deviations decreasing as $\lambda$ increases.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.23564 by A. Dehyadegari, A. Dezhakam, A. Sheykhi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Evolution of Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The behavior of the squared sound speed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.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

42 extracted references · 34 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    A. G. Riess et al., Observational Evidence from Super- novae for an Accelerating Universe and a Cosmologi- cal Constant , Astron. J. 116, 1009 (1998), [arXiv:astro- ph/9805201]

    arXiv 1998

  2. [2]

    Perlmutter et al., Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae, Astrophys

    S. Perlmutter et al., Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae, Astrophys. J. 517, 565 (1999), [arXiv:astro-ph/9812133]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  3. [3]

    D. N. Spergel et al., First-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Determina- tion of Cosmological Parameters , Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148, 175 (2003), [arXiv:astro-ph/0302209]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  4. [4]

    Tegmark et al., Cosmological parameters from SDSS and WMAP , Phys

    M. Tegmark et al., Cosmological parameters from SDSS and WMAP , Phys. Rev. D 69, 103501 (2004), [arXiv:astro-ph/0310723]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  5. [5]

    Weinberg, The Cosmological Constant Problem , Rev

    S. Weinberg, The Cosmological Constant Problem , Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 1 (1989)

    1989

  6. [6]

    P. J. E. Peebles and B. Ratra, The Cosmological Con- stant and Dark Energy , Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 559 (2003), [arXiv:astro-ph/0207347]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  7. [7]

    Ratra and P

    B. Ratra and P. J. E. Peebles, Cosmological Consequences of a Rolling Homogeneous Scalar Field , Phys. Rev. D 37, 3406 (1988)

    1988

  8. [8]

    Wetterich, Cosmology and the Fate of Dilatation Sym- metry, Nucl

    C. Wetterich, Cosmology and the Fate of Dilatation Sym- metry, Nucl. Phys. B 302, 668 (1988)

    1988

  9. [9]

    R. R. Caldwell, A Phantom Menace? , Phys. Lett. B 545, 23 (2002), [arXiv:astro-ph/9908168]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  10. [10]

    Nojiri and S

    S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, Unified cosmic his- tory in modified gravity: from F (R) theory to Lorentz non-invariant models , Phys. Rept. 505, 59 (2011), [arXiv:1011.0544]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  11. [11]

    Li, A Model of Holographic Dark Energy , Phys

    M. Li, A Model of Holographic Dark Energy , Phys. Lett. B 603, 1 (2004), [arXiv:hep-th/0403127]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  12. [12]

    S. Wang, Y. Wang, M. Li, Holographic dark energy, Phys. Rep. 696, 1 (2017), [arXiv:1612.00345]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  13. [13]

    E. N. Saridakis, Barrow holographic dark energy , Phys. Rev. D 102, 123525 (2020), [arXiv:2005.04115]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    Nojiri and S

    S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, Holographic dark energy, modified gravity and the coincidence problem , Gen. Rel. Grav. 38, 1285 (2006), [arXiv:hep-th/0506212]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  15. [15]

    F. R. Urban and A. R. Zhitnitsky, The QCD na- ture of Dark Energy , Nucl. Phys. B 835, 135 (2010), [arXiv:0909.2684]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  16. [16]

    F. R. Urban and A. R. Zhitnitsky, Large-Scale Magnetic Fields, Dark Energy and QCD , Phys. Rev. D 82, 043506 (2010), [arXiv:0912.3248]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  17. [17]

    Cai, Z.-L

    R.-G. Cai, Z.-L. Tuo, H.-B. Zhang, and Q. Su, Notes on Ghost Dark Energy , Phys. Rev. D 84, 123501 (2011), [arXiv:1011.3212]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  18. [18]

    Cai, Z.-L

    R.-G. Cai, Z.-L. Tuo, Y.-B. Wu, and Y. Zhao, More on QCD ghost dark energy , Phys. Rev. D 86, 023511 (2012), [arXiv:1201.0174]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  19. [19]

    Malekjani, Cosmography of interacting generalized QCD ghost dark energy , Astrophys

    M. Malekjani, Cosmography of interacting generalized QCD ghost dark energy , Astrophys. Space Sci. 343, 733 (2013), [arXiv:1202.4186]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  20. [20]

    Jacobson, Thermodynamics of spacetime: The Ein- stein equation of state , Phys

    T. Jacobson, Thermodynamics of spacetime: The Ein- stein equation of state , Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1260 (1995), [arXiv:gr-qc/9504004]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  21. [21]

    Padmanabhan, Gravity and the thermodynamics of horizons , Phys

    T. Padmanabhan, Gravity and the thermodynamics of horizons , Phys. Rept. 406, 49 (2005), [arXiv:gr- qc/0311036]

    arXiv 2005

  22. [22]

    Padmanabhan, Thermodynamical aspects of gravity: New insights , Rept

    T. Padmanabhan, Thermodynamical aspects of gravity: New insights , Rept. Prog. Phys. 73, 046901 (2010), [arXiv:0911.5004]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  23. [23]

    Cai and S

    R.-G. Cai and S. P. Kim, First law of thermodynam- ics and Friedmann equations of Friedmann-Robertson- Walker universe, J. High Energy Phys. 0502, 050 (2005), [arXiv:hep-th/0501055]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  24. [24]

    B. Wang, Y. Gong, E. Abdalla, Thermodynamics of an accelerated expanding universe, Phys. Rev. D 74, 083520 (2006), [arXiv:gr-qc/0511051]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  25. [25]

    Akbar and R

    M. Akbar and R. G. Cai, Thermodynamic behavior of the Friedmann equation at the apparent horizon of the FR W universe, Phys. Rev. D 75, 084003 (2007), [arXiv:hep- th/0609128]

    arXiv 2007

  26. [26]

    Kaniadakis, Statistical mechanics in the context of special relativity , Phys

    G. Kaniadakis, Statistical mechanics in the context of special relativity , Phys. Rev. E 66, 056125 (2002), [arXiv:cond-mat/0210467]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  27. [27]

    Kaniadakis, Statistical mechanics in the context of special relativity

    G. Kaniadakis, Statistical mechanics in the context of special relativity. II , Phys. Rev. E 72, 036108 (2005), [arXiv:cond-mat/0507311]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  28. [28]

    E. M. C. Abreu, J. Ananias Neto, E. M. Barboza, and R. C. Nunes, Jeans instability criterion from the viewpoint of Kaniadakis’s statistics , Eur. Phys. Lett. 114, 55001 (2016), [arXiv:1603.00296]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  29. [29]

    E. M. C. Abreu, J. Ananias Neto, E. M. Barboza, and R. C. Nunes, Tsallis and Kaniadakis statistics from the viewpoint of entropic gravity formalism , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 32, 1750028 (2017), [arXiv:1701.06898]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  30. [30]

    E. M. C. Abreu, J. Ananias Neto, A. C. R. Mendes, and A. Bonilla, Tsallis and Kaniadakis statistics from a point of view of the holographic equipartition law , Eur. Phys. Lett. 121, 45002 (2018), [arXiv:1711.06513]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  31. [31]

    E. M. C. Abreu, J. Ananias Neto, A. C. R. Mendes, and R. M. de Paula, Loop quantum gravity Immirzi parame- ter and the Kaniadakis statistics , Chaos Solitons Fractals 118, 307 (2019), [arXiv:1808.01891]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  32. [32]

    Sheykhi, Corrections to Friedmann equations inspired by Kaniadakis entropy, Phys

    A. Sheykhi, Corrections to Friedmann equations inspired by Kaniadakis entropy, Phys. Lett. B 850, 138495 (2024), [arXiv:2302.13012]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  33. [33]

    Lymperis, S

    A. Lymperis, S. Basilakos, and E. N. Saridakis, Modi- fied cosmology through Kaniadakis horizon entropy , Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 1037 (2021), [arXiv:2108.12366]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    G. G. Luciano, Modified Friedmann equations from Kani- adakis entropy and cosmological implications on baryoge- nesis and Li-abundance , Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 314 (2022)

    2022

  35. [35]

    Kord Zangeneh, A

    M. Kord Zangeneh, A. Sheykhi, Modified cosmology through Kaniadakis entropy , Mod. Phys. Lett. A 39, 2450138 (2024), [arXiv:2311.01969]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Dehyadegari, A

    A. Dehyadegari, A. Sheykhi, Modified entropy from action principle , Phys. Lett. B 880, 140751 (2026), [arXiv:2605.29814]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    S. A. Hayward, Unified first law of black-hole dynamics and relativistic thermodynamics , Class. Quant. Grav. 15, 3147 (1998) [arXiv:gr-qc/9710089]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  38. [38]

    S. A. Hayward, S. Mukohyama and M. C. Ashworth, Dy- namic black-hole entropy , Phys. Lett. A 256, 347 (1999) [arXiv:gr-qc/9810006]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  39. [39]

    Bak and S

    D. Bak and S. J. Rey, Cosmic Holography, Class. Quant. Grav. 17, L83 (2000), [arXiv:hep-th/9902173]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  40. [40]

    Sahni, T

    V. Sahni, T. D. Saini, A. A. Starobinsky, and U. Alam, Statefinder: A New geometrical diagnostic of dark energy , JETP Lett. 77, 201 (2003), [arXiv:astro- 9 ph/0201498]

    arXiv 2003

  41. [41]

    U. Alam, V. Sahni, T. D. Saini, and A. A. Starobinsky, Exploring the expanding Universe and dark energy us- ing the Statefinder diagnostic , Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 344, 1057 (2003), [arXiv:astro-ph/0303009]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  42. [42]

    Malekjani, A

    M. Malekjani, A. Khodam-Mohammadi, Statefinder diagnosis and the interacting ghost model of dark energy, Astrophys Space Sci 343, 451461 (2013), [arXiv:1202.4154]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013