REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by
Decay of dark energy into dark matter in a metric $f(R)$ gravity: effective running Hubble constant
T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read A metric f(R) gravity with dark energy decaying into dark matter reproduces the observed redshift-declining Hubble constant and best fits the 40-bin Pantheon supernova data.
desk verdict A coherent f(R)+dark-energy-decay toy model whose central fit claim is undercut by its own statistics and by comparing a local diagnostic to bin-integrated H0 values. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The central object is the effective running Hubble constant diagnostic $\mathcal{H}(z)$ of Eq. (33), built from the generalized Friedmann equation $H^2=(\chi/3)(\rho_\mathrm{tot}/\xi)$, where $\xi=df/dR$ is the non-minimal coupling scalar of the metric $f(R)$ theory. The reduction to a single extra parameter $\gamma$ is carried by the auxiliary condition $6H\dot{\xi}=V(\xi)$, together with the jerk-matching relation $k=(10-9\Omega_m^0)\gamma/[6(1-\Omega_m^0)]$ that fixes the dark-energy decay rate $\bar{H}$ in terms of $\gamma$. This condition rewrites the potential as $U=-\gamma E e^{-2x}$ and lets $U$, $\xi$, and $\mathcal{H}$ all be determined once $\gamma$ is fitted to the binned supernova data.
What would settle it
Reconstruct the f(R) Lagrangian from the best-fit $\xi(x)$ and $U(x)$ by inverting $\xi=df/dR$ and check whether the auxiliary condition $6H\dot{\xi}=V(\xi)$ is satisfied at every redshift in the fitted range $0<x<7$; a failure at any redshift would show the one-parameter reduction does not follow from the action. Alternatively, refit the 40-bin H0 values with each bin's matter density left free under a Gaussian prior: if the best-fit $\gamma$ moves by more than its 1-$\sigma$ error, the claimed best fit would not hold.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
On its own terms, the paper claims that the effective running Hubble constant \[ \mathcal{H}(z)=\frac{H_0\sqrt{\Omega_\mathrm{tot}(z)/\xi(z)}}{\sqrt{\$Omega_m^{0}$(1+z)^3+1-\$Omega_m^{0}$}} \] is the right diagnostic for the binned supernova data, and that the system of equations (4), (7)–(10) with the auxiliary condition $6H\dot{\xi}=V(\xi)$ yields this $\mathcal{H}(z)$ with only $\gamma$ as a new free parameter. Fitting $\gamma$ to the 40 Pantheon bins gives $\gamma=0.0162\pm0.0091$, which the authors describe as the most accurate match to the binned data obtained so far, better than the power-law profile and the bare LambdaCDM diagnostic. The paper also establishes that this value keeps the scalar-field squared mass positive throughout the evolution and keeps the deceleration and jerk parameters close to their LambdaCDM values. Its own statistical section reports $\chi^2_\mathrm{red}=2.01$, $p=0.0001$, and $R^2=0.0468$, and the authors state that no model achieves a too-optimised fit; they conclude that the model is a viable small modification of LambdaCDM for low-redshift SNIa physics but cannot be extrapolated to match Planck.
Load-bearing premise
The load-bearing premise is that the condition $6H\dot{\xi}=V(\xi)$ can be imposed by hand without deriving it from the f(R) action; if that condition is not physically justified, the simplified Friedmann equation, the $\mathcal{H}(z)$ formula, and the fitted value of $\gamma$ all fail to follow.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- The observed decline of H0 across redshift bins can be represented by a late-time modification that leaves LambdaCDM essentially unchanged at z=0, since the deceleration and jerk parameters remain close to their LambdaCDM values.
- The best-fit gamma=0.0162 lies within the interval that keeps the squared mass of the scalar degree of freedom positive, so the model contains no tachyonic mode over the whole evolution.
- Extrapolated to recombination, the effective Hubble constant asymptotes to about 72.35 km/s/Mpc, which is too high to match Planck; the model therefore cannot by itself remove the Hubble tension.
- Within the redshift range probed by the data, the model's reduced chi-square is lower than those of the power-law profile and the LambdaCDM diagnostic, and its AIC and BIC are competitive, supporting the relative ranking of the three profiles.
- The binned declining trend is not an artifact of the chosen absolute magnitude, because the same M is fixed across all bins; the H_eff(z) diagnostic is constructed specifically to test departures from LambdaCDM.
Reading between the lines
- The paper's own statistics imply that the 'good-quality fit' claim is relative to two worse alternatives rather than an adequate absolute description; a decisive next test is whether the improvement survives on the Pantheon+ and master supernova samples with the full systematic covariance.
- Because k is fixed to gamma by the jerk condition, a measurement of gamma from the H0 trend predicts a specific late-time dark-energy-to-dark-matter conversion rate; this prediction could be tested with growth-rate or weak-lensing data, which the paper does not use.
- The imposed condition $6H\dot{\xi}=V(\xi)$ selects a subclass of f(R) models; deriving it from a variational principle or showing that it corresponds to a known f(R) form would turn the one-parameter fit into a genuine Lagrangian prediction.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper considers a flat FLRW universe in metric f(R) gravity in the Jordan frame, with a non-minimally coupled scalar field xi and a phenomenological decay of dark energy into dark matter described by a constant rate. Imposing the relation 6H dxi/dt = V(xi) reduces the Friedmann equation to H^2 = (chi/3) rho_tot/xi, and a further condition on the jerk parameter leaves a single free parameter gamma beyond the LambdaCDM parameters. The authors construct an effective running Hubble constant H_eff(z) = H_model(z)/E_LCDM(z) (Eq. 33) and fit it to the 40-bin Pantheon H0 measurements of Dainotti et al. (2021a, 2022), obtaining gamma = 0.0162 +/- 0.0091. They report chi2_red = 2.01, p = 0.0001, R^2 = 0.047, and conclude that their model provides the best available fit to the binned data, while acknowledging that it cannot be extrapolated to match the Planck value.
Significance. If the empirical comparison were valid and the fit as good as claimed, the model would offer a physically motivated, one-parameter dynamical representation of the redshift-declining effective H0 seen in binned SNIa data, strengthening the case for late-time modified gravity and dark-sector interactions. The paper has the merit of presenting its diagnostics transparently (chi2, p, R^2, AIC/BIC, Bayes factor) and of explicitly noting that the model does not resolve the Hubble tension at recombination. However, as detailed below, the reported statistics contradict the 'good-quality fit' claim, the comparison with the binned data is not testing the model's actual prediction, and the dynamical reduction relies on an imposed ansatz. These issues currently preclude the paper's central claims.
major comments (4)
- [Abstract and Section 5.1, Eq. (39)] The abstract's statement that the model 'provides a good-quality fit' is contradicted by the paper's own statistics: chi2 = 78.51, chi2_red = 2.01, p = 0.0001, and R^2 = 0.0468. With 39 degrees of freedom, p = 0.0001 means the model is rejected at high significance, and R^2 ~ 0.05 means the model captures almost none of the variance in the binned H0 values. The improvement over the power-law model is also marginal: Delta chi2_red = 0.06, Delta AIC ~ 0.4, and the Bayes factor B = 1.21 (Eqs. 41-42) is 'weak evidence' by standard scales. The concluding remarks that this is 'the best fit to the Pantheon sample binned data' and a 'convincing representation' are therefore not supported. Please revise the central claim to describe the fit as a poor but marginally better alternative, or provide additional validation.
- [Section 5 and Eq. (33)] The comparison of H_eff(z) from Eq. (33) with the binned H0 data is not a valid test because the binned H0 values are not local measurements of the Hubble rate. As described in Section 5, each bin's H0 is obtained by fitting the full LambdaCDM distance modulus mu_th = 5 log10 d_L(z; H0, Omega_m) + 25 to the ~26 SNe in that bin with Omega_m fixed. The resulting H0_bin is an integral quantity over the bin's redshift distribution, approximately proportional to [integral dz / E_LCDM] / [integral dz / e_model], not to the local ratio e_model(z_i) / E_LCDM(z_i) used in Eq. (33). For the broad high-redshift bins (e.g., z > 1), the difference between these quantities can be comparable to the ~1-2% signal being modeled. Consequently, the fitted value gamma = 0.016 and the claimed improvement over the power-law are computed against a curve that is not the model's prediction for the binned data. The authors should either generate model predictions for the binned H0 by performing the same distance-modulus fitting procedure with their model, or use an H(z) dataset (e.g., cosmic chronometers) for which Eq. (33) is the actual observable.
- [Section 2.1, Eq. (9)] The condition 6H dxi/dt = V(xi) is imposed without derivation from the f(R) action. This condition is the key step that transforms the generalized Friedmann equation into Eq. (10), leads to the solution U = -gamma E e^{-2x} (Eq. 17), and ultimately yields the closed system (18)-(21) from which H_eff(z) is computed. The paper states that 'we choose those solutions that satisfy the following relation' and that V(xi) is reconstructed a posteriori, but it does not show that this relation is a property of a physical f(R) gravity, nor does it identify the corresponding f(R) Lagrangian. As it stands, the model is defined by this ansatz, and the fitted gamma is not a prediction of f(R) gravity but of the imposed constraint. Please provide a derivation of Eq. (9) from an explicit f(R) action, or demonstrate that it is an attractor of the full dynamics, or clearly state that the paper analyzes a particular class of solutions without claiming a fundamental derivation.
- [Section 3, Eq. (20)] Eq. (20) is internally inconsistent with the rest of the system. Combining Eq. (9) with the solution U = -gamma E e^{-2x} (Eq. 17) and the definition of U gives dxi/dx = gamma e^{-2x}/E, not gamma e^{2x}/E as printed. Using the printed expression would make xi grow without bound and would violate Eq. (9), whereas the corrected expression produces the plateau shown in Fig. 2. Since the numerical integration of Eqs. (18)-(21) used to generate H_eff and the fit depends on this equation, please correct Eq. (20) and verify that all numerical results were obtained with the correct sign and exponent.
minor comments (4)
- [Various] There are several typographical errors: 'Aknowledgment' should be 'Acknowledgments', 'Conceptulisation' should be 'Conceptualization', and the abstract's 'out-stands' should be 'stands out'.
- [Section 6] The sentence 'which is much larger than the observed one' is ambiguous; the intended meaning is that the asymptotic value 72.35 km/s/Mpc is larger than the Planck value, and the wording should be clarified.
- [Section 4, Eq. (29)] Eq. (29) imposes k as a function of gamma in order to force j0 = 1; please clarify whether this is a tuning assumption or a consistency requirement, and discuss the sensitivity of the fit to this choice.
- [Section 3] The text contains an empty equation number (15) immediately after Eq. (14); this artifact should be removed and subsequent equations renumbered.
Circularity Check
Running-H0 'prediction' is the in-sample fit of a one-parameter ansatz imported from the authors' prior work; the central claim is partly a re-description of the input trend.
-
ansatz smuggled in via citation
[Section 2.1, Eq. (9)]
"Following the approach discussed in Montani et al. (2023), we choose those solutions that satisfy the following relation 6H ξdot = V(ξ)."
Equation (9) is not derived from the f(R) action but is imported from Montani et al. (2023), a paper with overlapping authorship, where it is itself imposed as a choice. This ansatz is what reduces the dynamics to one new parameter γ (through U=-γE e^{-2x}) and fixes the form of H_eff(z) fitted in Section 5. Citing the authors' own prior adoption does not provide independent support, since that adoption is not a machine-checked or externally falsifiable result. Without Eq. (9), the one-parameter H_eff and the comparison to the binned data do not follow, making this a load-bearing self-citation rather than a first-principles derivation.
-
fitted input called prediction
[Section 5, Eq. (36); Section 6]
"A non-linear fit to the 40-bin distribution (see Fig. 1) of H0 yields the best-fit value for γ as γ = 0.0162 ± 0.0091 ... we compared the theoretical prediction of H(x), as determined by our model, with the data from the 40 SNIa bins. A non-linear fit was performed ... allowing only the parameter γ to vary in the fitting procedure."
The only free parameter shaping H_eff(z) in Eq. (33) is γ, and Eq. (36) is obtained by minimizing the chi-squared in Eq. (37) against the same 40 binned H0 values that are then presented as the empirical target. The 'theoretical prediction' f(x_i) is therefore the fitted curve by construction; the reported χ2_red, AIC, BIC, and the claimed improvement over the power-law are in-sample statistics, not independent tests. The abstract's 'good-quality fit' is a restatement of the fitting procedure, not corroboration of a first-principles prediction.
full rationale
The paper's derivation chain is transparently parametric rather than circular in the strict sense: the f(R) action, the decay equations, and the fitting of γ to the Pantheon binned H0 are all stated. No step equates a predicted quantity to its input by definition, and no uniqueness theorem is imported. However, two load-bearing moves borrow from the authors' own prior work and from the same data being 'explained': (i) Eq. (9) is an imposed relation taken from Montani et al. (2023), and this ansatz produces the single-parameter H_eff; (ii) the 'theoretical prediction' in Section 6 is a non-linear fit of γ to the same 40 bins, so the resulting χ2, AIC, and improvement over the power-law are in-sample statistics. The fitted γ=0.0162 also coincides within errors with the power-law index α=0.016 from Dainotti et al. (2021a), so the model largely re-describes the known trend with a slightly different functional form. These issues warrant a moderate score. Independent content remains: the model predicts a specific non-power-law shape, ensures a positive scalar mass (Eq. 22), and is compared to external Pantheon data, so the circularity is not total. Separately, Section 5.1 reports p=0.0001 and R2=0.0468, which the paper itself says indicate significant tension and poor variance capture; the abstract's 'good-quality fit' is thus unsupported by the paper's own statistics, a correctness problem rather than a circularity. The comparison of local H/H_LCDM to binned H0 values obtained from ΛCDM distance-modulus fits is also a methodological concern but is not itself circular.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (4)
- gamma =
0.0162 ± 0.0091 (best fit, Eq. 36)
- k (interaction rate ratio) =
k = (10-9*Omega_m0)/(6*(1-Omega_m0)) * gamma ≈ 0.0282 (derived from Eq. 29, not independently fitted)
- H0 (fiducial) =
73.5 km/s/Mpc (fixed, from SH0ES calibration)
- Omega_m0 (fiducial) =
0.298 (fixed)
assumptions (5)
- domain assumption Late Universe with only pressureless matter and dark energy (P_de = -rho_de), radiation negligible
- domain assumption Constant dark energy decay rate Hbar into dark matter only
- ad hoc to paper Condition 6H * d(xi)/dt = V(xi)
- ad hoc to paper Relation k = (10-9*Omega_m0)/(6*(1-Omega_m0)) * gamma
- domain assumption Tachyonic mass positivity mu_xi^2 >= 0 at x=0 used to restrict gamma < 0.071
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Decay of dark energy into dark matter in a metric $f(R)$ gravity: effective running Hubble constant." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/27C77CAT
@misc{pith2026250613288,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Decay of dark energy into dark matter in a metric $f(R)$ gravity: effective running Hubble constant},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/27C77CAT}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.13288}
}
abstract
We examine a modified late-Universe dynamics where dark energy decays into dark matter, within the framework of metric $f(R)$-gravity in the Jordan frame. After a detailed analysis of the modified $\Lambda \text{CDM}$ model, we introduce a theoretical diagnostic tool to capture the emergence of an effective running Hubble constant as a function of redshift. We then compare this theoretical model with the 40-bin analysis of the Supernova Pantheon sample. This comparison allows us to determine the value of the additional free parameter that appears in our model, beyond those of the standard $\Lambda \text{CDM}$ model. Our modified late Universe dynamics provides a good-quality fit to the binned data, improving upon the previous phenomenological interpretation based on a power-law decay. However, unlike the power-law model, our approach cannot be extrapolated to the recombination redshift to match the Hubble constant measured by the Planck satellite. In fact, the dynamics resulting from the binned Pantheon sample analysis address only weakly the Hubble tension between the SH0ES and the Planck Collaboration values of the Hubble constant. Here we provide a convincing representation of the observed deviation of the cosmological dynamics from the $\Lambda$CDM-one, as it out-stands from the low redshift observed sources.
Figures
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
BAO miscalibration cannot rescue late-time solutions to the Hubble tension
Even after rescaling BAO data to prefer H0≈73 km/s/Mpc, none of six tested late-time dark-energy models can resolve the Hubble tension once unanchored SNeIa and CMB geometry are included.
-
Exponential $f(R)$ cosmology with massive neutrinos as a dynamical dark energy framework
Exponential f(R) gravity with massive neutrinos fits current expansion data about as well as ΛCDM and yields slightly different H0 and Σmν constraints, but does not eliminate the Hubble tension.
-
Investigating $f(R)$-Inflation: background evolution and constraints
A Jordan-frame f(R) model with particle creation during inflation is fitted to DESI and Pantheon+ data, yielding H0=71.04 and a claimed reduction of the Hubble tension to about 1.6-2.8 sigma.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[7]
The CosmoVerse White Paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics arXiv:2504.01669. Efstathiou, G.,
-
[15]
Dark matter solutiontothe 𝐻0 and𝑆8 tensions,andtheintegratedSachs-Wolfevoid anomaly. Phys. Rev. D 109, 083511. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.083511. Nojiri, S., Odintsov, S., Oikonomou, V.,
-
[18]
Modeling and testing the equation of state for (Early) dark en- ergy. Phys. Dark Univ. 32, 100837. doi:10.1016/j.dark.2021.100837, arXiv:2103.05304. Olmo, G.J., 2005a. The gravity lagrangian according to solar system experiments. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 261102. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 95.261102. Olmo, G.J., 2005b. Post-newtonian constraints on𝑓(𝑟) cosmologi...
-
[19]
f(R) gravity in the Jor- danframeasaparadigmfortheHubbletension. Mon.Not.Roy.Astron. Soc. 522, L72–L77. doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad041, arXiv:2211.16737. Scolnic, D.M., et al. (Pan-STARRS1),
-
[21]
New physics in light of the𝐻0 tension: An alternative view. Phys. Rev. D 102, 023518. URL:https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevD.102.023518, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.023518. Vagnozzi, S.,
-
[24]
doi:10.3390/galaxies10010024, arXiv:2201.09848. Dainotti, M.G., Lenart, A.L., Yengejeh, M.G., Chakraborty, S., Fraija, N., Di Valentino, E., Montani, G.,
-
[69]
Taylor and Francis. doi:10.1201/9780429492860. Lemos, P., Lee, E., Efstathiou, G., Gratton, S.,
-
[94]
Jia,X.D.,Hu,J.P.,Wang,F.Y.,2023
doi:10.3390/universe9020094, arXiv:2302.05709. Jia,X.D.,Hu,J.P.,Wang,F.Y.,2023. Evidenceofadecreasingtrendforthe Hubble constant. Astron. Astrophys. 674, A45. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/ 202346356, arXiv:2212.00238. Kolb, E.W., Turner, M.S.,
arXiv 2023
Show all 22 references
-
[393]
3390/universe9090393, arXiv:2308.16628
doi:10. 3390/universe9090393, arXiv:2308.16628. G. Montani, M. De Angelis, M.G. Dainotti:Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 8 of 8
-
[662]
Montani, G., Carlevaro, N., Escamilla, L.A., Di Valentino, E., 2025b
doi:10.3390/e26080662, arXiv:2407.12409. Montani, G., Carlevaro, N., Escamilla, L.A., Di Valentino, E., 2025b. Kinetic model for dark energy—dark matter interaction: Scenario for the hubble tension. Phys. Dark Univ. 48, 101848. doi:10.1016/j.dark. 2025.101848, arXiv:2404.15977...
-
[2010]
A&A 523, A7
The Supernova Legacy Survey 3-year sample: Type Ia supernovae photometric distances and cosmological constraints⋆⋆⋆. A&A 523, A7. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201014468. Hu,J.P.,Wang,F.Y.,2023. HubbleTension:TheEvidenceofNewPhysics. Universe 9,
2023 doi
-
[2011]
A&A 529, L4
The reddening law of type ia supernovae: separating intrinsic variability from dust using equivalent widths⋆. A&A 529, L4. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201116723. Guy, J., Sullivan, M., et al.,
-
[2014]
Canonical Quantum Gravity: Fundamentals and Recent Developments. doi:10. 1142/8957. Dainotti, M.G., De Simone, B., Schiavone, T., Montani, G., Rinaldi, E., Lambiase, G., 2021a. On the Hubble constant tension in the SNe Ia Pantheonsample. Astrophys.J.912,150. doi: 10.3847/1538-...
-
[2017]
PhysicsReports 692, 1–104
Modified gravity theories onanutshell:Inflation,bounceandlate-timeevolution. PhysicsReports 692, 1–104. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2017.06.001. mod- ified Gravity Theories on a Nutshell: Inflation, Bounce and Late-time Evolution. Nojiri, S., Odintsov, S., Oikonomou, V.,
2017 doi
-
[2018]
Astrophys.J.859,101
The Complete Light-curve Sample of Spectroscopically Confirmed SNe Ia from Pan-STARRS1 and Cosmological Constraints from the Combined Pantheon Sample. Astrophys.J.859,101. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab9bb, arXiv:1710.00845. Sotiriou,T.P.,Faraoni,V.,2010. f(R)TheoriesOfGravity. Re...
-
[2019]
Model independent 𝐻(𝑧) reconstruction using the cosmic inverse distance ladder. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 483, 4803–4810. doi:10.1093/mnras/sty3082, arXiv:1806.06781. Montani, G., Carlevaro, N., Dainotti, M.G., 2024a. Slow- rolling scalar dynamics as solution for the Hubble ...
-
[2020]
Planck 2018 results. VI. Cos- mological parameters. Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6. doi: 10.1051/ 0004-6361/201833910, arXiv:1807.06209. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]. Banerjee, S., Petronikolou, M., Saridakis, E.N.,
2021 arXiv
-
[2021]
To H0 or not to H0? Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 505, 3866–3872. doi:10.1093/mnras/stab1588, arXiv:2103.08723. Factory, T.N.S., Chotard, N., Gangler, E., et al.,
-
[2022]
Nuclear Physics B980,115850
Integral F(R) gravity and saddle point condition as a remedy for the H0-tension. Nuclear Physics B980,115850. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/S0550321322002012, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2022. 115850. Nojiri, S., Odintsov, S.D., Saez-Chill...
-
[2023]
Alleviating the H0 tension with new gravitational scalar tensor theories. Phys. Rev. D 108, 024012. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.024012, arXiv:2209.02426. Brout,D.,etal.,2022. ThePantheon+Analysis:CosmologicalConstraints. Astrophys.J.938,110. doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac8e04, arXiv:2...
2022 arXiv
-
[2024]
Montani, M
A new binning method to choose G. Montani, M. De Angelis, M.G. Dainotti:Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 7 of 8 a standard set of Quasars. Phys. Dark Univ. 44, 101428. doi:10.1016/j. dark.2024.101428, arXiv:2401.12847. Dainotti,M.G.,Petrosian,V.,Bowden,L.,2021b. Cosmologica...
2024
-
[2025]
Di Valentino, E., Bøehm, C., Hivon, E., Bouchet, F.R., 2018a
A New Master Supernovae Ia sample and the investigation of the𝐻0 tension arXiv:2501.11772. Di Valentino, E., Bøehm, C., Hivon, E., Bouchet, F.R., 2018a. Reducing the𝐻0 and𝜎8 tensions with Dark Matter-neutrino interactions. Phys. Rev. D 97, 043513. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.04351...
Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.