REVIEW 7 cited by
Omnipotent dark energy: A phenomenological answer to the Hubble tension
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
This paper introduces the class of omnipotent dark energy (DE) models characterized by nonmonotonic energy densities that are capable of attaining negative values with corresponding equation of state parameters featuring phantom divide line (PDL) crossings and singularities. These nontrivial features are phenomenologically motivated by findings of previous studies that reconstruct cosmological functions from observations, and the success of extensions of $\Lambda$CDM, whose actual or effective DE density is omnipotent, in alleviating the observational discordance within $\Lambda$CDM. As an example, we focus on one embodiment of omnipotent DE, viz., the DE parametrization introduced in Di Valentino et al. [Dark energy with phantom crossing and the H0 tension, Entropy 23, 404 (2021)] (DMS20). By updating and extending the datasets used in the original paper where it was introduced, we confirm the effectiveness of DMS20 in alleviating the observational discrepancies. Additionally, we uncover that its negative DE density feature, importance of which was not previously investigated, plays a crucial role in alleviating the tensions, along with the PDL crossing feature that the parametrization presupposes. In particular, we find that there is a positive correlation between the $H_0$ parameter and the scale ($a_p$) at which DE density transitions from negative to positive, in agreement with previous studies that incorporate this transition feature. For our full dataset, the model yields $H_0=70.05 \pm 0.64$ (68% CL) relaxing the $H_0$ tension with a preference of crossing to negative DE densities ($a_p>0$ at 99% CL), along with the constraint $a_m=0.922^{+0.041}_{-0.035}$ on the scale of the presupposed PDL crossing.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
Hubble tension: the shape wall
Late-time modifications to the expansion history can raise H0 by at most about 2% (conservative) to 3.7% (permissive) if the CMB acoustic scale is fixed.
-
Defocusing dark energy: Raychaudhuri diagnostics beyond $w<-1/3$ and the phantom divide
For sign-changing effective dark energy, smooth negative-to-positive density crossings make ρ+3p and ρ+p the correct diagnostics, give w=p/ρ a universal pole n(1+z†)/3, and force repulsion onset z_rep>z† while ρ<0.
-
Alleviating the Hubble Tension with Smooth Sign-Switching Dark Energy: Full CMB Constraints with DESI and PantheonPlus
Smooth ECDM dark energy remains compatible with Planck+ACT+SPT, DESI DR2 and Pantheon+/SH0ES while alleviating the Hubble tension through a controlled late-time density transition.
-
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.
-
Mapping the $\Lambda_{\rm s}$CDM scenario to $f(T)$ modified gravity: Effects on structure growth rate
A new f(T) gravity model that reproduces the ΛsCDM background but modifies structure growth via an effective Newton's constant is constructed and constrained with RSD data, yielding a 2σ preference for a non-zero grow...
-
Background-level reconstruction of scalar-field potentials from dark-energy histories and comparison with analytic potential families
A background reconstruction maps prescribed ρ_de(z) histories to V(φ) and ranks analytic potentials by Bayesian evidence, with exponential preferred for CPL and shifted-tanh for sign-switching targets.
-
An overview of what current data can (and cannot yet) say about evolving dark energy
The apparent preference for evolving dark energy depends strongly on which supernova catalog and which BAO survey are used, and is not robust across all independent data combinations.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.