REVIEW 2 cited by
Cosmological Constraints on $f(G)$ Dark Energy Models
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
Modified gravity theories with the Gauss-Bonnet term $G=R^2-4R^{\mu\nu}R_{\mu\nu}+R^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$ have recently gained a lot of attention as a possible explanation of dark energy. We perform a thorough phase space analysis on the so-called $f(G)$ models, where $f(G)$ is some general function of the Gauss-Bonnet term, and derive conditions for the cosmological viability of $f(G)$ dark energy models. Following the $f(R)$ case, we show that these conditions can be nicely presented as geometrical constraints on the derivatives of $f(G)$. We find that for general $f(G)$ models there are two kinds of stable accelerated solutions, a de Sitter solution and a phantom-like solution. They co-exist with each other and which solution the universe evolves to depends on the initial conditions. Finally, several toy models of $f(G)$ dark energy are explored. Cosmologically viable trajectories that mimic the $\Lambda$CDM model in the radiation and matter dominated periods, but have distinctive signatures at late times, are obtained.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Generalized Misner-Sharp energy in $f(R,\mathcal{G})$ gravity
This paper extends the Misner-Sharp quasilocal energy to f(R,G) gravity and applies it to apparent horizon thermodynamics, finding a phase transition in the adiabatic index for certain models.
-
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.