pith. sign in

arxiv: 2508.10514 · v8 · pith:3CCONL2Fnew · submitted 2025-08-14 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · gr-qc· hep-th

Evidence for evolving dark energy from DESI DR2 BAO and Pantheon^+, DES-Dovekie, and Union3

Himanshu Chaudhary , Salvatore Capozziello , Vipin Kumar Sharma , Isidro G\'omez-Vargas , G. Mustafa This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 07:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-th
keywords DESI DR2baryon acoustic oscillationsevolving dark energyQuintom-BType Ia supernovaedark energy equation of statephantom crossingw0-wa plane
0
0 comments X

The pith

DESI DR2 baryon acoustic oscillation data combined with supernova catalogs indicate a preference for evolving dark energy in the Quintom-B regime.

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

The paper tests whether dark energy remains constant or evolves by fitting multiple parameterizations to DESI DR2 BAO measurements together with three different Type Ia supernova datasets and CMB information. It reports that the combined data favor models in which the equation of state begins above -1 and becomes more negative, placing all fits inside the w0 > -1, wa < 0 quadrant. A reader would care because such evolution would require extending the standard cosmological model and could point toward new physics at late times. The preference is traced mainly to the LRG1-2 galaxy tracers and stays modest in statistical significance. Every parameterization examined also produces a crossing of w = -1 near redshift 0.5 while the dark energy density fraction settles to its present value at z = 0.

Core claim

Analyses of DESI Data Release 2 baryon acoustic oscillation measurements combined with Pantheon+, DES-Dovekie, or Union3 supernova datasets and CMB likelihood yield evidence for dynamical dark energy. Each parameterization returns best-fit values inside the w0 > -1, wa < 0 quadrant characteristic of Quintom-B behavior. Logarithmic Bayes factors show only inconclusive-to-moderate support, with no model achieving robust preference from late-time data alone. The equation-of-state evolution crosses the phantom divide near z ~ 0.5 in most models, and the dark energy density fraction converges to f_DE(0) = 1 in every case.

What carries the argument

The w0-wa parameterization applied across Logarithmic, Exponential, CPL, BA, JBP, Thawing, Mirage, and GEDE models, with the LRG1-2 BAO tracers supplying the dominant pull toward w0 > -1.

If this is right

  • All examined models place their best fits inside the Quintom-B quadrant of the w0-wa plane.
  • The equation of state w(z) exhibits a phantom crossing near redshift 0.5 in the majority of the models.
  • The Mirage parameterization returns the highest logarithmic Bayes factor, though still only inconclusive-to-moderate evidence.
  • Statistical significance across dataset combinations remains between 1.1 and 2.3 sigma.
  • The dark energy density fraction f_DE(z) converges to its present-day value of 1 at z = 0 for every model.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the LRG1-2-driven signal holds, future surveys with finer tracer separation could isolate whether the preference survives when individual galaxy samples are analyzed separately.
  • The consistent Quintom-B preference across parameterizations suggests possible links to scalar-field models that allow the equation of state to cross -1.
  • The modest significance and tracer dependence together indicate that cross-checks against independent late-time probes such as weak-lensing or cluster counts would be needed before interpreting the result as new physics.
  • The reported phantom crossing at z ~ 0.5 supplies a concrete redshift target for next-generation BAO or supernova measurements to test.

Load-bearing premise

The LRG1-2 tracer measurements can be treated as independent and unbiased even though each supplies only limited observables that may produce underconstrained or unstable parameter inference.

What would settle it

A re-analysis restricted to independent tracers or additional high-redshift BAO points that removes the w0 > -1 preference would falsify the reported evidence for evolving dark energy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.10514 by G. Mustafa, Himanshu Chaudhary, Isidro G\'omez-Vargas, Salvatore Capozziello, Vipin Kumar Sharma.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: The figure shows the posterior distributions at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: The figure shows the posterior distributions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The figure shows posterior distributions in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The figure shows the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: The figure shows the posterior distributions of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: The figure shows the posterior distributions of different planes of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: The figure shows the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: The figure shows the posterior distributions of different planes of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: The figure shows the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: The figure shows the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: The figure shows a comparison of various models relative to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13: This figure shows the evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14: This figure shows the evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_14.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Evidences for evolving dark energy are shown using baryon acoustic oscillation measurements from the recent Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument Data Release 2 , combined with different Type Ia supernova datasets (Pantheon$^+$, DES-Dovekie, and Union3) and the CMB compressed likelihood. We examine several dark energy parameterizations, including the Logarithmic, Exponential, CPL, BA, JBP, Thawing, Mirage, and GEDE models. Analyzing the DESI DR2 measurements alone, we find that evidence for evolving dark energy is primarily driven by the LRG1-2 tracers, as their inclusion yields a preferred value of $w_0 > -1$. However, as each tracer provides only limited observables, this preference can result in an underconstrained and potentially unstable inference. Further, we find that each dark energy model predicts values in the $w_0 > -1$, $w_a < 0$ quadrant, a region characterized by the Quintom-B type dark energy scenario. The logarithmic bayes factor shows that, among all models, the Mirage model shows the inconclusive-to-moderate evidence across all dataset combinations. Consistently, the statistical significance remains modest, with $N\sigma \sim 1.1$-$2.3$, and no model showing a robust preference for dynamical dark energy using late-time datasets alone. The evolution of $w(z)$ shows a phantom crossing around $z \sim 0.5$ in most dynamical dark energy models, and the evolution of $f_{\mathrm{DE}}(z)$ converges to $f_{\mathrm{DE}}(0) = 1$ in all dark energy models.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes DESI DR2 BAO measurements (with emphasis on LRG1-2 tracers) combined with Pantheon+, DES-Dovekie, and Union3 supernova datasets plus CMB compressed likelihood. It fits eight dark energy parameterizations (Logarithmic, Exponential, CPL, BA, JBP, Thawing, Mirage, GEDE) and reports that any preference for evolving dark energy (w0 > -1, wa < 0, Quintom-B scenario) is primarily driven by LRG1-2, yields only 1.1-2.3 sigma significance, shows phantom crossing near z ~ 0.5 in most models, and finds no robust preference from late-time data alone; the Mirage model receives inconclusive-to-moderate Bayes-factor support.

Significance. The multi-model comparison and explicit acknowledgment of modest significance and tracer limitations are strengths. If the LRG1-2-driven signal survives additional validation, the consistent placement of all models in the w0 > -1, wa < 0 quadrant would be a useful data point for dynamical dark energy discussions. Currently the acknowledged risk of underconstrained inference from limited observables per tracer reduces the result's impact; the work does not include machine-checked proofs or independent forecasts.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and title: The title asserts 'Evidence for evolving dark energy' and the abstract opens with 'Evidences for evolving dark energy are shown', yet the text states that 'no model showing a robust preference for dynamical dark energy using late-time datasets alone' and reports only N sigma ~1.1-2.3. This framing mismatch is load-bearing for the central claim.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract (LRG1-2 paragraph): The w0 > -1 preference is explicitly attributed to the LRG1-2 tracers, with the caveat that 'each tracer provides only limited observables, this preference can result in an underconstrained and potentially unstable inference.' No cross-tracer consistency tests, mock-data recovery, or stability checks are described to address this acknowledged limitation, which directly supports the reported evidence.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We agree that the framing of the title and abstract requires adjustment to better reflect the modest significance of the results, and we will expand the discussion of limitations associated with the LRG1-2 tracers. Our point-by-point responses follow.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and title: The title asserts 'Evidence for evolving dark energy' and the abstract opens with 'Evidences for evolving dark energy are shown', yet the text states that 'no model showing a robust preference for dynamical dark energy using late-time datasets alone' and reports only N sigma ~1.1-2.3. This framing mismatch is load-bearing for the central claim.

    Authors: We acknowledge the referee's concern regarding the potential mismatch between the title/abstract phrasing and the qualified results presented in the body of the paper. Although the manuscript consistently reports the modest significance (1.1-2.3 sigma) and explicitly states that no model shows a robust preference using late-time datasets alone, the opening language may convey a stronger implication than intended. To address this, we will revise the title to 'Constraints on evolving dark energy from DESI DR2 BAO and supernova datasets' and rephrase the abstract opening to 'We investigate indications of evolving dark energy...' while preserving all existing caveats and quantitative statements. These changes will ensure consistency with the reported findings. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (LRG1-2 paragraph): The w0 > -1 preference is explicitly attributed to the LRG1-2 tracers, with the caveat that 'each tracer provides only limited observables, this preference can result in an underconstrained and potentially unstable inference.' No cross-tracer consistency tests, mock-data recovery, or stability checks are described to address this acknowledged limitation, which directly supports the reported evidence.

    Authors: The manuscript already includes an explicit caveat regarding the potential for underconstrained inference from the LRG1-2 tracers owing to their limited observables. We agree that dedicated cross-tracer consistency tests, mock-data recovery, or stability checks would provide additional reassurance. However, performing these analyses lies beyond the scope of the present work. We will revise the abstract and relevant discussion sections to more prominently emphasize this limitation, its implications for the w0 > -1 preference, and the need for future validation with additional data or tracers. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical model fits to external BAO+SN data with explicit caveats

full rationale

The paper performs standard Bayesian fits of several dark energy parameterizations (CPL, Mirage, etc.) to DESI DR2 BAO tracers plus external supernova and CMB likelihoods. Reported w0-wa posteriors, Bayes factors, w(z) evolution, and f_DE(z) are direct outputs of those fits; the manuscript does not present them as independent first-principles predictions or derivations. No self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes from prior author work are invoked to justify the models or close the inference loop. The explicit statement that LRG1-2 drives the w0 > -1 preference and may yield underconstrained results is a self-acknowledged limitation, not a hidden circular reduction. All central claims remain falsifiable against the supplied external datasets.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on eight standard dark-energy parameterizations whose functional forms are taken from the literature, plus the usual flat-FLRW background, linear perturbation theory for BAO, and the assumption that supernova magnitude corrections are correctly applied. No new entities are introduced. The free parameters are the two or more coefficients in each parameterization (w0, wa, etc.) that are fitted to the data.

free parameters (1)
  • w0, wa (and equivalents) in each of eight models
    Two or more free parameters per parameterization are varied to fit the combined BAO+SN+CMB likelihood; their posterior values define the reported 'evidence' for evolution.
axioms (2)
  • standard math Standard flat FLRW metric and linear perturbation theory for BAO scale
    Invoked throughout the cosmological likelihood construction.
  • domain assumption Type Ia supernovae are standardizable candles after the usual corrections
    Required to convert Pantheon+, DES-Dovekie and Union3 magnitude-redshift data into distance moduli.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5866 in / 1743 out tokens · 43146 ms · 2026-05-25T07:45:51.461235+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Evidence for deviation in gravitational light deflection from general relativity at cosmological scales with KiDS-Legacy and CMB lensing

    astro-ph.CO 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0

    KiDS-Legacy weak lensing plus CMB data yields a 3 sigma deviation in light deflection from GR in a Lambda CDM background, with the signal driven by large-scale CMB lensing amplitudes.

  2. Joint Constraints on Neutrinos and Dynamical Dark Energy in Minimally Modified Gravity

    astro-ph.CO 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    The w†VCDM model shows a statistically significant preference for late-time quintessence-phantom crossing dark energy, raises the Hubble constant, and satisfies neutrino mass and Neff constraints from current cosmolog...

  3. Constraints of dynamical dark energy models from different observational datasets

    astro-ph.CO 2025-10 conditional novelty 4.0

    Bayesian constraints on seven w(a) parameterizations with CMB+BAO+SNIa datasets favor the logarithmic model over LambdaCDM in several combinations and show modest sigma8 relief.

  4. Probing departures from $\Lambda$CDM by late-time datasets

    astro-ph.CO 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Late-time datasets yield 1-2.74σ preference for dynamical dark energy over ΛCDM, with consistent signs of Quintom-B behavior (ω0 > -1, ωa < 0) that strengthen when DES-Dovekie or Union3 supernovae are added.

  5. Beyond CPL: Evidence for dynamical dark energy in three-parameter models

    astro-ph.CO 2025-10 conditional novelty 4.0

    Two three-parameter extensions of the mAH dark energy parametrization are compared to LambdaCDM, wCDM, CPL and others using CMB, DESI BAO, H(z), RSD and three SNIa samples, yielding Delta chi-squared improvements of 6...

  6. Dark Energy in Ghost-free non-local Gravity

    gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    Ghost-free non-local gravity fits Pantheon+, DESI, and H(z) data but fails with added CMB, while generalized exponential F(R) gravity outperforms Lambda CDM across all datasets including CMB.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

106 extracted references · 106 canonical work pages · cited by 6 Pith papers · 19 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    (ω 0 =−1.005±0.036). Furthermore, our results also agree with the constraints obtained from DESI DR2 combined with CMB data and various SNe Ia measure- ments, as reported by [7]:ω 0 =−0.995±0.023 with PP ,ω0 =−0.971±0.021 with DES-SN5Y, andω 0 = −0.997±0.027 with Union3. Figs. 7b, 7c, 7d, 7e, and 7f show theω 0 −ω a plane for the Logarithmic, Exponential,...

    work page

  2. [2]

    A. G. Riess, et al., Observational evidence from super- novae for an accelerating universe and a cosmologi- cal constant, Astron. J. 116 (1998) 1009–1038.arXiv: astro-ph/9805201,doi:10.1086/300499

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/300499 1998

  3. [3]

    Measurements of Omega and Lambda from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae

    S. Perlmutter, et al., Measurements ofΩandΛfrom 42 High Redshift Supernovae, Astrophys. J. 517 (1999) 565– 586.arXiv:astro-ph/9812133,doi:10.1086/ 307221

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  4. [4]

    Bamba, S

    K. Bamba, S. Capozziello, S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, Dark energy cosmology: the equivalent description via dif- ferent theoretical models and cosmography tests, As- trophys. Space Sci. 342 (2012) 155–228.arXiv:1205. 3421,doi:10.1007/s10509-012-1181-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s10509-012-1181-8 2012

  5. [5]

    Sousa-Neto, C

    A. Sousa-Neto, C. Bengaly, J. E. Gonzalez, J. Alcaniz, Evidence for dynamical dark energy from DESI-DR2 and SN data? A symbolic regression analysis (6 2025). arXiv:2502.10506

    work page arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    A. G. Adame, et al., DESI 2024 VI: cosmological con- straints from the measurements of baryon acoustic os- cillations, JCAP 02 (2025) 021.arXiv:2404.03002, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/02/021

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/02/021 2024

  7. [7]

    Calderon, et al., DESI 2024: reconstructing dark en- ergy using crossing statistics with DESI DR1 BAO data, JCAP 10 (2024) 048.arXiv:2405.04216,doi:10

    R. Calderon, et al., DESI 2024: reconstructing dark en- ergy using crossing statistics with DESI DR1 BAO data, JCAP 10 (2024) 048.arXiv:2405.04216,doi:10. 1088/1475-7516/2024/10/048

    work page arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    M. A. Karim, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, L. Allen, C. Allende Prieto, O. Alves, A. Anand, U. Andrade, E. Armengaud, et al., Desi dr2 results ii: Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological con- straints, arXiv e-prints (2025) arXiv–2503

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Lodha, et al., DESI 2024: Constraints on physics- focused aspects of dark energy using DESI DR1 BAO data, Phys

    K. Lodha, et al., DESI 2024: Constraints on physics- focused aspects of dark energy using DESI DR1 BAO data, Phys. Rev. D 111 (2) (2025) 023532.arXiv:2405. 13588,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.023532

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.023532 2024

  10. [10]

    Notari, M

    A. Notari, M. Redi, A. Tesi, BAO vs. SN evidence for evolving dark energy, JCAP 04 (2025) 048.arXiv: 2411.11685,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/04/ 048

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/04/ 2025

  11. [11]

    V . k. Sharma, H. Chaudhary, S. Kolekar, Probing Gener- alized Emergent Dark Energy with DESI DR2 (7 2025). arXiv:2507.00835

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Dymnikova, M

    I. Dymnikova, M. Y. Khlopov, Self-consistent initial con- ditions in inflationary cosmology., Gravitation and Cos- mology 4 (1998) 50–55

    work page 1998

  13. [13]

    Dymnikova, M

    I. Dymnikova, M. Khlopov, Decay of cosmological con- stant as bose condensate evaporation, Modern Physics Letters A 15 (38n39) (2000) 2305–2314

    work page 2000

  14. [14]

    Dymnikova, M

    I. Dymnikova, M. Khlopov, Decay of cosmological con- stant in self-consistent inflation, The European Physical Journal C-Particles and Fields 20 (1) (2001) 139–146

    work page 2001

  15. [15]

    S. Ray, M. Khlopov, P . P . Ghosh, U. Mukhopadhyay, Phe- nomenology ofλ-cdm model: a possibility of accelerat- ing universe with positive pressure, International Jour- nal of Theoretical Physics 50 (3) (2011) 939–951

    work page 2011

  16. [16]

    Doroshkevich, M

    A. Doroshkevich, M. Y. Khlopov, Formation of structure in a universe with unstable neutrinos, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 211 (2) (1984) 277–282

    work page 1984

  17. [17]

    P . A. Ade, N. Aghanim, C. Armitage-Caplan, M. Ar- naud, M. Ashdown, F. Atrio-Barandela, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, A. J. Banday, R. Barreiro, et al., Planck 2013 results. xvi. cosmological parameters, Astronomy & Astrophysics 571 (2014) A16

    work page 2013

  18. [18]

    Betoule, R

    M. Betoule, R. Kessler, J. Guy, J. Mosher, D. Hardin, R. Biswas, P . Astier, P . El-Hage, M. Konig, S. Kuhlmann, et al., Improved cosmological constraints from a joint analysis of the sdss-ii and snls supernova samples, As- tronomy & Astrophysics 568 (2014) A22

    work page 2014

  19. [19]

    P . A. Ade, N. Aghanim, M. Arnaud, M. Ashdown, J. Au- mont, C. Baccigalupi, A. Banday, R. Barreiro, J. Bartlett, N. Bartolo, et al., Planck 2015 results-xiii. cosmological parameters, Astronomy & Astrophysics 594 (2016) A13

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    Brout, D

    D. Brout, D. Scolnic, B. Popovic, A. G. Riess, A. Carr, J. Zuntz, R. Kessler, T. M. Davis, S. Hinton, D. Jones, et al., The pantheon+ analysis: cosmological constraints, The Astrophysical Journal 938 (2) (2022) 110

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    Rubin, G

    D. Rubin, G. Aldering, M. Betoule, A. Fruchter, X. Huang, A. G. Kim, C. Lidman, E. Linder, S. Perlmut- ter, P . Ruiz-Lapuente, et al., Union through unity: Cos- mology with 2000 sne using a unified bayesian frame- work, The Astrophysical Journal 986 (2) (2025) 231

    work page 2000

  22. [22]

    Adame, J

    A. Adame, J. Aguilar, S. Ahlen, S. Alam, D. Alexander, M. Alvarez, O. Alves, A. Anand, U. Andrade, E. Armen- gaud, et al., Desi 2024 vi: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations, Jour- nal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2025 (02) (2025) 021

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Extended Dark Energy analysis using DESI DR2 BAO measurements

    K. Lodha, R. Calderon, W. Matthewson, A. Shafieloo, M. Ishak, J. Pan, C. Garcia-Quintero, D. Huterer, G. Val- ogiannis, L. Ure ˜na-L´opez, et al., Extended dark en- ergy analysis using desi dr2 bao measurements, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14743 (2025). 20

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Scherer, M

    M. Scherer, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes, A. De Fe- lice, Challengingλcdm: 5σevidence for a dynam- ical dark energy late-time transition, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.20664 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Barua, S

    S. Barua, S. Desai, Constraints on dark energy models using late universe probes, Physics of the Dark Universe 49 (2025) 101995.doi:https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.dark.2025.101995. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S2212686425001888

    work page doi:10.1016/j.dark.2025.101995 2025

  26. [26]

    Vilardi, S

    S. Vilardi, S. Capozziello, M. Brescia, Discriminating between cosmological models using data-driven meth- ods, Astron. Astrophys. 695 (2025) A166.arXiv:2408. 01563,doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451779

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451779 2025

  27. [27]

    S. R. Choudhury, T. Okumura, Updated cosmolog- ical constraints in extended parameter space with planck pr4, desi baryon acoustic oscillations, and super- novae: Dynamical dark energy, neutrino masses, lens- ing anomaly, and the hubble tension, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 976 (1) (2024) L11

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    S. R. Choudhury, Cosmology in extended parameter space with desi dr2 bao: A 2σ+ detection of non- zero neutrino masses with an update on dynami- cal dark energy and lensing anomaly, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.15340 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Benetti, S

    M. Benetti, S. Capozziello, Connecting early and late epochs by f(z)CDM cosmography, JCAP 12 (2019) 008.arXiv:1910.09975,doi:10.1088/ 1475-7516/2019/12/008

    work page arXiv 2019

  30. [30]

    A. T. Petreca, M. Benetti, S. Capozziello, BeyondΛCDM with f(z)CDM: Criticalities and solutions of Pad ´e Cos- mography, Phys. Dark Univ. 44 (2024) 101453.arXiv: 2309.15711,doi:10.1016/j.dark.2024.101453

    work page doi:10.1016/j.dark.2024.101453 2024

  31. [31]

    G. Efstathiou, Constraining the equation of state of the universe from distant type ia supernovae and cosmic mi- crowave background anisotropies, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 310 (3) (1999) 842–850

    work page 1999

  32. [32]

    Silva, R

    R. Silva, R. Goncalves, J. Alcaniz, H. Silva, Thermody- namics and dark energy, Astronomy & Astrophysics 537 (2012) A11

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    S. Pan, W. Yang, A. Paliathanasis, Imprints of an ex- tended chevallier–polarski–linder parametrization on the large scale of our universe, The European Physical Journal C 80 (3) (2020) 274

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    Dimakis, A

    N. Dimakis, A. Karagiorgos, A. Zampeli, A. Paliathana- sis, T. Christodoulakis, P . A. Terzis, General analytic so- lutions of scalar field cosmology with arbitrary poten- tial, Physical Review D 93 (12) (2016) 123518

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    Najafi, S

    M. Najafi, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, J. T. Firouzjaee, Dy- namical dark energy confronted with multiple cmb mis- sions, Physics of the Dark Universe 45 (2024) 101539

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Chevallier, D

    M. Chevallier, D. Polarski, Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter, International Journal of Modern Physics D 10 (02) (2001) 213–223

    work page 2001

  37. [37]

    E. V . Linder, Exploring the expansion history of the uni- verse, Physical review letters 90 (9) (2003) 091301

    work page 2003

  38. [38]

    Barboza Jr, J

    E. Barboza Jr, J. Alcaniz, A parametric model for dark energy, Physics Letters B 666 (5) (2008) 415–419

    work page 2008

  39. [39]

    Jassal, J

    H. Jassal, J. Bagla, T. Padmanabhan, Wmap constraints on low redshift evolution of dark energy, Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters 356 (1) (2005) L11–L16

    work page 2005

  40. [40]

    Lodha, A

    K. Lodha, A. Shafieloo, R. Calderon, E. Linder, W. Sohn, J. Cervantes-Cota, A. De Mattia, J. Garc ´ıa-Bellido, M. Ishak, W. Matthewson, et al., Desi 2024: Constraints on physics-focused aspects of dark energy using desi dr1 bao data, Physical Review D 111 (2) (2025) 023532

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    X. Li, A. Shafieloo, Evidence for emergent dark energy, The Astrophysical Journal 902 (1) (2020) 58

    work page 2020

  42. [42]

    Vazquez, I

    J. Vazquez, I. Gomez-Vargas, A. Slosar, Updated version of a simple mcmc code for cosmological parameter esti- mation where only expansion history matters,https: //github.com/ja-vazquez/SimpleMC(2020)

    work page 2020

  43. [43]

    Aubourg, S

    ´E. Aubourg, S. Bailey, J. E. Bautista, F. Beutler, V . Bhard- waj, D. Bizyaev, M. Blanton, M. Blomqvist, A. S. Bolton, J. Bovy, et al., Cosmological implications of baryon acoustic oscillation measurements, Physical Review D 92 (12) (2015) 123516.doi:https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevD.92.123516

    work page 2015

  44. [44]

    W. K. Hastings, Monte carlo sampling methods using markov chains and their applications (1970)

    work page 1970

  45. [45]

    Gelman, D

    A. Gelman, D. B. Rubin, Inference from iterative simu- lation using multiple sequences, Statistical science 7 (4) (1992) 457–472

    work page 1992

  46. [46]

    Marginal Likelihoods from Monte Carlo Markov Chains

    A. Heavens, Y. Fantaye, A. Mootoovaloo, H. Eggers, Z. Hosenie, S. Kroon, E. Sellentin, Marginal likeli- hoods from monte carlo markov chains, arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.03472 (2017)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  47. [47]

    Aghanim, Y

    N. Aghanim, Y. Akrami, M. Ashdown, J. Aumont, C. Baccigalupi, M. Ballardini, A. J. Banday, R. Barreiro, N. Bartolo, S. Basak, et al., Planck 2018 results-vi. cos- mological parameters, Astronomy & Astrophysics 641 (2020) A6

    work page 2018

  48. [48]

    The Dark Energy Survey: Cosmology Results With ~1500 New High-redshift Type Ia Supernovae Using The Full 5-year Dataset

    T. Abbott, M. Acevedo, M. Aguena, A. Alarcon, S. Al- lam, O. Alves, A. Amon, F. Andrade-Oliveira, J. An- nis, P . Armstrong, et al., The dark energy survey: Cos- mology results with˜ 1500 new high-redshift type ia su- pernovae using the full 5-year dataset, arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.02929 (2024)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  49. [49]

    Goliath, R

    M. Goliath, R. Amanullah, P . Astier, A. Goobar, R. Pain, Supernovae and the nature of the dark energy, Astron- omy & Astrophysics 380 (1) (2001) 6–18

    work page 2001

  50. [50]

    Efstathiou, J

    G. Efstathiou, J. R. Bond, Cosmic confusion: degen- eracies among cosmological parameters derived from measurements of microwave background anisotropies, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 304 (1) (1999) 75–97

    work page 1999

  51. [51]

    Kosowsky, M

    A. Kosowsky, M. Milosavljevic, R. Jimenez, Efficient cos- mological parameter estimation from microwave back- ground anisotropies, Physical Review D 66 (6) (2002) 063007

    work page 2002

  52. [52]

    Y. Wang, S. Wang, Distance priors from planck and dark energy constraints from current data, Physical Review 21 D—Particles, Fields, Gravitation, and Cosmology 88 (4) (2013) 043522

    work page 2013

  53. [53]

    Chaudhary, S

    H. Chaudhary, S. Capozziello, V . K. Sharma, G. Mustafa, Does desi dr2 challengeλcdm paradigm?, arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.21607 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    E. ´O. Colg ´ain, M. G. Dainotti, S. Capozziello, S. Pouro- jaghi, M. Sheikh-Jabbari, D. Stojkovic, Does desi 2024 confirmλcdm ?, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.08633 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    ´O Colg´ain, M

    E. ´O Colg´ain, M. Sheikh-Jabbari, R. Solomon, G. Bargiac- chi, S. Capozziello, M. G. Dainotti, D. Stojkovic, Reveal- ing intrinsic flatλcdm biases with standardizable can- dles, Physical Review D 106 (4) (2022) L041301

    work page 2022

  56. [56]

    E. ´O. Colg ´ain, S. Pourojaghi, M. Sheikh-Jabbari, L. Yin, How much has desi dark energy evolved since dr1?, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.04417 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    Ye, S.-J

    G. Ye, S.-J. Lin, On the tension between desi dr2 bao and cmb, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.02207 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    E. ´O. Colg ´ain, M. Sheikh-Jabbari, R. Solomon, M. G. Dainotti, D. Stojkovic, Putting flatλcdm in the (redshift) bin, Physics of the Dark Universe 44 (2024) 101464

    work page 2024

  59. [59]

    M. G. Dainotti, B. De Simone, T. Schiavone, G. Montani, E. Rinaldi, G. Lambiase, M. Bogdan, S. Ugale, On the evolution of the hubble constant with the sne ia pan- theon sample and baryon acoustic oscillations: a feasi- bility study for grb-cosmology in 2030, Galaxies 10 (1) (2022) 24

    work page 2030

  60. [60]

    M. G. Dainotti, B. De Simone, T. Schiavone, G. Montani, E. Rinaldi, G. Lambiase, On the hubble constant tension in the sne ia pantheon sample, The Astrophysical Jour- nal 912 (2) (2021) 150

    work page 2021

  61. [61]

    X. Jia, J. Hu, F. Wang, Evidence of a decreasing trend for the hubble constant, Astronomy & Astrophysics 674 (2023) A45

    work page 2023

  62. [62]

    Past ´en, V

    E. Past ´en, V . H. C´ardenas, Testingλcdm cosmology in a binned universe: Anomalies in the deceleration param- eter, Physics of the Dark Universe 40 (2023) 101224

    work page 2023

  63. [63]

    Malekjani, R

    M. Malekjani, R. Mc Conville, E. ´O Colg ´ain, S. Pouro- jaghi, M. Sheikh-Jabbari, On redshift evolution and neg- ative dark energy density in pantheon+ supernovae, The European Physical Journal C 84 (3) (2024) 317

    work page 2024

  64. [64]

    Wagner, Solving the hubble tension\a la ellis & stoeger 1987, arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.11219 (2022)

    J. Wagner, Solving the hubble tension\a la ellis & stoeger 1987, arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.11219 (2022)

    work page arXiv 1987

  65. [65]

    Hu, F.-Y

    J.-P . Hu, F.-Y. Wang, Revealing the late-time transition of h 0: relieve the hubble crisis, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 517 (1) (2022) 576–581

    work page 2022

  66. [66]

    Dainotti, B

    M. Dainotti, B. De Simone, G. Montani, T. Schiavone, G. Lambiase, The hubble constant tension: current sta- tus and future perspectives through new cosmological probes, arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.10572 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  67. [67]

    Krishnan, E

    C. Krishnan, E. ´O. Colg ´ain, Ruchika, A. A. Sen, M. Sheikh-Jabbari, T. Yang, Is there an early universe solution to hubble tension?, Physical Review D 102 (10) (2020) 103525

    work page 2020

  68. [68]

    M. G. Dainotti, G. Sarracino, S. Capozziello, Gamma-ray bursts, supernovae ia, and baryon acoustic oscillations: A binned cosmological analysis, Publications of the As- tronomical Society of Japan 74 (5) (2022) 1095–1113

    work page 2022

  69. [69]

    Bargiacchi, M

    G. Bargiacchi, M. G. Dainotti, S. Capozziello, High- redshift cosmology by Gamma-Ray Bursts: An overview, New Astron. Rev. 100 (2025) 101712. arXiv:2408.10707,doi:10.1016/j.newar. 2024.101712

    work page doi:10.1016/j.newar 2025

  70. [70]

    Risaliti, E

    G. Risaliti, E. Lusso, Cosmological constraints from the hubble diagram of quasars at high redshifts, Nature As- tronomy 3 (3) (2019) 272–277

    work page 2019

  71. [71]

    Lusso, G

    E. Lusso, G. Risaliti, E. Nardini, G. Bargiacchi, M. Benetti, S. Bisogni, S. Capozziello, F. Civano, L. Eggleston, M. Elvis, et al., Quasars as standard candles-iii. validation of a new sample for cosmological studies, Astronomy & Astrophysics 642 (2020) A150

    work page 2020

  72. [72]

    M. G. Dainotti, G. Bargiacchi, A. Ł. Lenart, S. Nagataki, S. Capozziello, Quasars: Standard candles up to z= 7.5 with the precision of supernovae ia, The Astrophysical Journal 950 (1) (2023) 45

    work page 2023

  73. [73]

    M. G. Dainotti, G. Bargiacchi, A. Ł. Lenart, S. Capozziello, E. ´O. Colg ´ain, R. Solomon, D. Sto- jkovic, M. Sheikh-Jabbari, Quasar standardization: overcoming selection biases and redshift evolution, The Astrophysical Journal 931 (2) (2022) 106

    work page 2022

  74. [74]

    Bargiacchi, M

    G. Bargiacchi, M. Dainotti, S. Nagataki, S. Capozziello, Gamma-ray bursts, quasars, baryonic acoustic oscilla- tions, and supernovae ia: new statistical insights and cosmological constraints, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 521 (3) (2023) 3909–3924

    work page 2023

  75. [75]

    Pourojaghi, N

    S. Pourojaghi, N. Zabihi, M. Malekjani, Can high- redshift hubble diagrams rule out the standard model of cosmology in the context of cosmography?, Physical Review D 106 (12) (2022) 123523

    work page 2022

  76. [76]

    K. C. Wong, S. H. Suyu, G. C. Chen, C. E. Rusu, M. Mil- lon, D. Sluse, V . Bonvin, C. D. Fassnacht, S. Tauben- berger, M. W. Auger, et al., H0licow–xiii. a 2.4 per cent measurement of h 0 from lensed quasars: 5.3σtension between early-and late-universe probes, Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society 498 (1) (2020) 1420–1439

    work page 2020

  77. [77]

    A. J. Shajib, S. Birrer, T. Treu, A. Agnello, E. Buckley- Geer, J. Chan, L. Christensen, C. Lemon, H. Lin, M. Mil- lon, et al., Strides: a 3.9 per cent measurement of the hubble constant from the strong lens system des j0408- 5354, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Soci- ety 494 (4) (2020) 6072–6102

    work page 2020

  78. [78]

    Millon, A

    M. Millon, A. Galan, F. Courbin, T. Treu, S. Suyu, X. Ding, S. Birrer, G.-F. Chen, A. Shajib, D. Sluse, et al., Tdcosmo-i. an exploration of systematic uncertainties in the inference of h0 from time-delay cosmography, As- tronomy & Astrophysics 639 (2020) A101

    work page 2020

  79. [79]

    P . L. Kelly, S. Rodney, T. Treu, M. Oguri, W. Chen, A. Zitrin, S. Birrer, V . Bonvin, L. Dessart, J. M. Diego, et al., Constraints on the hubble constant from super- nova refsdal’s reappearance, Science 380 (6649) (2023) eabh1322

    work page 2023

  80. [80]

    Pascale, B

    M. Pascale, B. L. Frye, J. D. Pierel, W. Chen, P . L. Kelly, S. H. Cohen, R. A. Windhorst, A. G. Riess, P . S. Kamieneski, J. M. Diego, et al., Sn h0pe: the first mea- 22 surement of h0 from a multiply imaged type ia super- nova, discovered by jwst, The Astrophysical Journal 979 (1) (2025) 13

    work page 2025

Showing first 80 references.