Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 64 references

Holographic dark energy with slower-than-L^4 horizon entropy crosses the phantom divide uniquely from quintessence into phantom at a maximum of the event-horizon radius, and that crossing fixes the local entropy-scaling dimension.

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

2026-07-31 04:38 UTC pith:HJ76ODAM

load-bearing objection Solid kinematic analysis of phantom crossing in generalized holographic DE; the math checks out, novelty is real but incremental, and the load-bearing density ansatz is correctly flagged by the author. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.26089 v1 pith:HJ76ODAM submitted 2026-07-27 gr-qc astro-ph.CO

Phantom-Divide Crossing in Barrow-Tsallis Holographic Dark Energy with a Scale-Dependent Barrow Exponent

D. A. Yerokhin This is my paper
classification gr-qc astro-ph.CO
keywords holographic dark energyBarrow-Tsallis entropyphantom dividefuture event horizonentropy-scaling dimensionscale-dependent Barrow exponentgeneralized second lawautonomous cosmological system
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 studies a flat universe filled with ordinary matter or radiation plus holographic dark energy whose infrared cutoff is the future event horizon. The horizon entropy is allowed to deviate from the usual area law by any smooth positive function of the horizon radius. Reducing the background equations to a closed autonomous system, the author shows that when entropy grows more slowly than the fourth power of the radius, the equation-of-state parameter w crosses -1 exactly once, at an extremum of the horizon radius, and always from the quintessence side (w > -1) into the phantom side (w < -1). The kinematics of that crossing supply an exact formula for the local entropy-scaling dimension in terms of the deceleration parameter and the slope of w, so the sign of the local CPL coefficient at crossing becomes a direct observational constraint on how entropy scales with horizon size. A local prescription for a scale-dependent Barrow exponent then reconstructs the full entropy function, early-time matter and radiation eras remain intact, and a global integral condition on the horizon selects which late-time destinies (de Sitter, Type III or Big Rip singularities, or accelerated power-law expansion) are physically allowed. Thermodynamics further demands an extra dark-energy entropy contribution once the phantom regime is entered, because the equilibrium Gibbs entropy already fails the generalized second law at the crossing itself.

Core claim

On the kinematic branch HL = 1, for any barotropic background with w_b > -1 and any entropy modification whose local logarithmic slope satisfies chi_cr < 2, the phantom-divide crossing is unique inside the physical phase space 0 < Omega_X < 1, occurs at a strict local maximum of the event-horizon radius, proceeds from quintessence into phantom, and yields the exact local entropy-scaling dimension d_S,cr = 4 + 3 w'_X,cr / (1 + q_cr) expressed solely in kinematic quantities.

What carries the argument

The closed autonomous system for the logarithmic horizon-size variable y and the dark-energy density parameter Omega_X, together with the kinematic identity u' = q + u that forces u' > 0 wherever u = 1; this turns the level set HL = 1 into a unique, observationally usable crossing surface and supplies the exact reconstruction formula for d_S,cr.

Load-bearing premise

Dark-energy density is assumed proportional to the modified horizon entropy divided by the square of the horizon radius—an independent modeling choice the paper itself notes is not fixed by the original holographic bound.

What would settle it

Reconstruct d_S,cr from the measured deceleration parameter and dw_X/dz at a putative kinematic crossing; if the value lies outside the interval corresponding to entropy growth slower than L^4 (and faster than L^0), or if a direct fit of the model’s expansion history yields a negative local w_a while chi_cr < 2, the claimed class of entropies is ruled out.

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

If this is right

  • The sign of the local CPL coefficient at crossing equals the sign of (4 - d_S,cr), so a measured negative local w_a would require entropy growth faster than L^4 and would exclude the entire class considered.
  • The integral condition that the future-event-horizon definition be recovered selects only trajectories that end in de Sitter attractors, Type III or Big Rip singularities, or (for delta = 1) accelerated power-law expansion.
  • Once the phantom regime is entered, the generalized second law cannot be satisfied by horizon entropy plus barotropic entropy alone; an additional dark-energy entropy contribution is required.
  • The adiabatic sound speed diverges at the crossing, so any consistent perturbation theory must introduce non-adiabatic pressure or internal degrees of freedom.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because the local entropy-scaling dimension is fixed purely by background kinematics, forthcoming high-precision measurements of q(z) and w'(z) near z ~ 0 can constrain quantum-gravity corrections to horizon entropy without needing a full microphysical model.
  • The necessity of extra dark-energy entropy in the phantom phase suggests that holographic models with future-horizon cutoffs may be incomplete unless they incorporate nonequilibrium entropy production or chemical-potential terms.
  • The same kinematic uniqueness proof extends immediately to any number of non-interacting barotropic fluids, so multi-component early-universe histories do not reopen the possibility of multiple crossings on the HL = 1 branch.

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

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies flat two-component cosmology (barotropic fluid with constant w_b plus holographic dark energy) with the future event horizon as IR cutoff and a general entropy modification S_h = S_BH F(L), specializing to a Barrow–Tsallis form with a locally prescribed, scale-dependent Barrow exponent Δ_loc(L). The dynamics reduces to a closed autonomous system (15)–(16) in (y, Ω_X). On the kinematic branch u ≡ (HL)^{-1} = 1, the author proves the phantom-divide crossing is unique in 0 < Ω_X < 1 (because u′_cr = (3/2)(1+w_b)(1−Ω_X,cr) > 0 strictly, Eq. 21), occurs at a strict local maximum of L, and proceeds from quintessence to phantom for w_b > −1 and χ_cr < 2 (Eq. 26). Exact kinematic relations for the local entropy-scaling dimension d_S,cr = 4 + 3w′_X,cr/(1+q_cr) (Eq. 28, and a jerk form Eq. 86) are derived. The event-horizon integral definition is converted into the necessary-and-sufficient selection criterion ∫u dN = ∞ (Eq. 62), and the admissible late-time states (de Sitter, Type III, Big Rip, power-law) are classified for the reconstructed F(L) (Eq. 45, Table 1). A numerical example confirms the analytics. The GSL is shown to fail at the crossing for an equilibrium Gibbs entropy (Eq. 92), and the barotropic adiabatic sound speed diverges (Eq. 97). I verified the derivation chain of Eqs. (18), (20), (21), (26), (28) and spot-checked the numerical example (78)–(80); all reproduce as stated.

Significance. If the framework is accepted, the paper delivers several genuinely useful results: (i) a model-independent, parameter-light exact relation (28) between d_S,cr and purely kinematic quantities, with a parametrization-free jerk version (86) — these are falsifiable: a reconstructed d_S,cr outside the stated range excludes the whole entropy class; (ii) a clean uniqueness proof for the kinematic crossing based on the strict positivity of u′ on the level set u = 1; (iii) the necessary-and-sufficient criterion (62) that converts the nonlocal event-horizon definition into a trajectory-selection tool, clarifying the status of the homogeneous mode Ca; (iv) an analytic reconstruction of F(L) from a local Δ_loc prescription (41), (45), avoiding the known inconsistency of substituting Δ(L) into the power-law formula; (v) an honest treatment of where the model breaks down (GSL at the crossing, c²_a divergence). The work is analytic, internally checked numerically, and appropriately cautious about the DESI comparison (no fit is claimed; the sign mismatch with the best-fit CPL region is stated openly). Its reach is bounded by the ansatz (8), which is an independent model assumption — the author dis

major comments (2)
  1. [§2, Eq. (8) and footnote 1] All central results — the autonomous system (15)–(16), the crossing kinematics (21), (26), (28), and the reconstructed F(L) — inherit from the density ansatz ρ_X = 3c_H²M_Pl²F(L)/L². The paper is commendably explicit (§2 and footnote 1) that this is an independent model assumption and that its only thermodynamic motivation, the first-law energy E(L) = ∫T_h dS_h, coincides with (8) only for constant χ; for varying χ the first-law expression is a nonlocal functional of F. The difficulty is that the varying-χ regime is precisely the paper's advertised novelty, so the motivating case is the one where the motivation fails. This is not an internal inconsistency, and I do not regard it as disqualifying, but the manuscript should do one of two things: (a) derive the modified autonomous system implied by the nonlocal first-law density E(L) ∝ M_Pl²[LF(L) + ∫F dℓ]/L³ and state which of the load-bea
  2. [§6.1, Eqs. (81)–(84); abstract] The paper's bridge to observations is the sign criterion sign w_{a,loc}(a_cr) = sign(2 − χ_cr) = sign(4 − d_S,cr) (Eq. 83), contrasted with the DESI DR2 best-fit region w_0 > −1, w_a < 0. The text correctly notes that a CPL coefficient fitted over a finite redshift interval need not equal the local slope, and declines to perform a fit. However, the illustrative model of §5.3 makes the tension concrete: the crossing lies at z_cr = −0.14 (future) with w_{a,loc} ≈ 0.33, i.e. the opposite direction to the DESI-preferred crossing at z ~ 0.4–0.5. Since the abstract highlights the connection to the CPL coefficient, the paper should either (i) include a minimal quantitative confrontation — e.g., compute the model-predicted w_0 and an effective fitted w_a over the DESI redshift lever arm for a representative parameter set, showing whether any (δ, Δ_UV, κ, c_H) choice reproduces the observed sign
minor comments (6)
  1. [§1, notation] The subscript X is overloaded in the literature with the kinetic invariant of k-essence; the author warns of this in §1, but a different component label (e.g. 'h' or 'de') would remove the collision entirely, especially since Vikman's no-go result is discussed in the same paper.
  2. [§3.1, Eq. (27)] The range (27), −2 < χ ≤ 1, is introduced for the uniqueness/direction results, but the sign and uniqueness argument itself only needs w_b > −1 and χ_cr < 2. It would help the reader to mark which statements require the full range (27) (e.g. the d_S bounds in (87)) and which hold under the weaker condition.
  3. [§5.3 vs §6.1] The subscript '0' denotes the initial epoch of the numerical solution in §5.3 but the present epoch in §6.1; the text flags this, yet the two usages appear in adjacent sections and invite confusion. Distinct symbols (e.g. 'i' for the integration start) would be cleaner.
  4. [§6.2, Eqs. (90)–(92)] In §6.2, the GSL argument assumes the additive decomposition S_tot = S_h + S_b + S_X; the caveat about nonextensive nonadditivity appears only at the end of the subsection. Given that the model is built on Tsallis-type entropy, this caveat deserves to be stated before Eq. (90) rather than after Eq. (92), and a brief remark on how a nonadditive composition rule could evade the conclusion would be welcome.
  5. [Figs. 1–2; formatting] Figures 1 and 2 are legible but small; the inset in Fig. 2 showing c²_a near the crossing would benefit from axis labels and a statement of the N-range. The arXiv text contains recurring spacing artifacts (e.g. 'coefficientw a,loc', 'ForF= 1'), presumably from PDF extraction — please check the source for missing spaces.
  6. [References; §5.2] Reference [42] (the author's own related work on Barrow–Tsallis entropy) is cited as motivating context; a sentence clarifying what is taken from it versus what is new here would help position the novelty. Also consider citing Ref. [49] (dynamical-systems review) at the first use of fixed-point/Jacobian methods in §5.2 rather than only at the compactification remark.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: kinematic crossing uniqueness and d_S,cr follow algebraically from the ODEs plus an openly stated ansatz, not from fitted inputs or load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The central results—unique kinematic crossing of w_X=−1 at u=1 for χ_cr<2, direction from quintessence into phantom, and the exact inversion d_S,cr=4+3w′_X,cr/(1+q_cr)—are obtained by differentiating the closed autonomous system (15)–(16) that follows from the Friedmann and continuity equations together with the kinematic identity Ḋ=HL−1 and the model relation (8). Uniqueness is a phase-space argument (u′>0 everywhere on the level set u=1 inside 0<Ω_X<1), not an imported theorem. The local CPL sign relation (83) and the reconstruction of F(L) from a prescribed Δ_loc profile are likewise constructive, not fitted. The paper explicitly flags (8) as an independent assumption that coincides with a first-law construction only for constant χ (footnote 1); that is a correctness/ansatz risk, not circularity. Normalization freedom is quotiented out via (17). The single numerical example is illustrative and is not used to tune a prediction that is then re-sold as independent. Self-citation [42] (shared authorship) is peripheral and not load-bearing for the crossing kinematics. No equation reduces a claimed prediction to a parameter defined by that same prediction. Score 0 is therefore appropriate.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 2 invented entities

The load-bearing content rests on standard flat FLRW dynamics plus three model-level choices: the event-horizon IR cutoff, the density–entropy ansatz ρ_X ∝ F(L)/L², and the additive entropy decomposition used for the GSL. Free functions/parameters (F or equivalently Δ_loc, c_H, δ, Δ_UV, κ, L_t) label the model class; the kinematic crossing theorems are proved inside that class without further fitting. No new particle or force is introduced; the ‘additional dark-energy entropy’ is required by the GSL analysis but left unspecified.

free parameters (3)
  • c_H = 1.1 (illustrative)
    Dimensionless holographic prefactor; controls whether u = 1 is reachable (Ω_X,cr = c_H² F(y_cr) < 1). Chosen by hand in the numerical example (c_H = 1.1).
  • F(L) or equivalently Δ_loc(L) profile = δ=0.8, Δ_UV=1, κ=2, L_t=L_* (illustrative)
    Arbitrary smooth positive deformation of Bekenstein–Hawking entropy; the concrete monotonic profile (42) introduces Δ_UV, L_t, κ, and δ as free shape parameters.
  • wb = 0 (matter era example)
    Constant barotropic index of the non-dark-energy fluid; theorems use wb > −1 (uniqueness) and wb > −1/3 (early-time asymptotics). Set to 0 or 1/3 in applications.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Spatially flat FLRW cosmology with two noninteracting components obeying separate continuity equations and the standard Friedmann equation (2)–(4).
    Stated at the opening of §2; no modified gravity or dark-sector interaction.
  • domain assumption IR cutoff is the future event horizon L, with Ḋ = HL − 1 and the boundary condition lim_{t→t_f} L/a = 0, equivalently ∫ u dN = ∞ (5)–(6), (62).
    Standard holographic-DE choice; the integral form is elevated to a selection criterion in §5.1.
  • ad hoc to paper Dark-energy density is given by ρ_X = 3 c_H² M_Pl² F(L)/L² with S_h = S_BH F(L) (7)–(8).
    Paper explicitly calls this an independent model assumption not fixed by the original holographic bound (§2, footnote 1).
  • ad hoc to paper Local entropy-scaling dimension is restricted to −2 < χ ≤ 1 (range 27) for the main uniqueness/direction theorems.
    Lower bound keeps S_h increasing with L; upper bound is the Barrow maximal-fractal limit d_S ≤ 3. Outside this range the crossing direction can reverse.
  • domain assumption Total entropy for the GSL is decomposed additively as S_tot = S_h + S_b + S_X (§6.2).
    Standard operational form of the GSL; paper notes nonextensive composition rules could differ but adopts the linear split.
invented entities (2)
  • Additional dark-energy entropy S_X required in the phantom regime no independent evidence
    purpose: Restore the generalized second law after S_h + S_b decreases for u > 1 and after the equilibrium Gibbs definition gives S'_X,cr = 0.
    Demanded by inequality (90) and the exact failure (92); no microscopic model, chemical potential, or nonequilibrium production mechanism is supplied.
  • Local Barrow exponent Δ_loc(L) as the logarithmic derivative prescription (40) no independent evidence
    purpose: Preserve the meaning of a local power-law exponent when the Barrow parameter runs, and allow analytic reconstruction of F(L).
    Introduced to avoid the extra δ ln(L/ℓ_P) dΔ/d ln L term that appears if Δ(L) is substituted directly into the global power law; the profile (42) is a chosen interpolant, not derived from a beta function.

pith-pipeline@v1.2.0-grok45-kimik3 · 26066 in / 4102 out tokens · 82860 ms · 2026-07-31T04:38:14.626632+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We consider a spatially flat cosmological model containing a noninteracting barotropic fluid and holographic dark energy with the future event horizon as the infrared cutoff. We parametrize the deviation of the horizon entropy from the Bekenstein--Hawking form by a smooth positive function of the horizon radius. We reduce the background evolution to a closed autonomous system and analytically describe the crossing of the phantom divide, $w=-1$. For entropies growing more slowly than the fourth power of the radius, the crossing is unique, occurs at an extremum of the event-horizon radius, and proceeds from the quintessence regime into the phantom regime. The local Chevallier-Polarski-Linder coefficient $w_{a,\mathrm{loc}}$ at the crossing is then positive, and its sign directly constrains the local entropy-scaling dimension at the horizon scale. The crossing kinematics yields an exact expression for the local entropy-scaling dimension, and a local prescription for the scale-dependent Barrow exponent in the Barrow--Tsallis entropy enables an analytic reconstruction of the entropy function. The early-time asymptotics remain consistent with the standard matter- and radiation-dominated eras, while the event-horizon consistency criterion selects physically admissible late-time trajectories leading to de Sitter states, to Type III or Big Rip singularities, or, for $\delta=1$, to accelerated power-law expansion. The analytic results are illustrated numerically. Within the adopted decomposition of the total entropy, the generalized second law of thermodynamics further requires an additional dark-energy entropy in the phantom regime: the equilibrium entropy evolution implied by the Gibbs relation fails to satisfy the law already at the crossing, where the purely barotropic adiabatic description of perturbations also breaks down.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.26089 by D. A. Yerokhin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Phase-space trajectory for the pa￾rameters (76). The dashed line corresponds to the level set u = 1, that is, ΩX = c 2 HF(y). The diamond marks the initial conditions, the circle the unique crossing point, the cross the saddle point, and the square the de Sitter at￾tractor. which by (69) is an attractor. In the limit N → ∞ one has u → 1, so the integral in (62) diverges. The numerical solution therefore sa… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Evolution of wX(N) along the tra￾jectory of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_2.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

64 extracted references · 39 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological constraints from the mea- surements of baryon acoustic oscilla- tions.Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics, 2025(02):021, 2025

    DESI Collaboration. DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological constraints from the mea- surements of baryon acoustic oscilla- tions.Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics, 2025(02):021, 2025. arXiv:2404.03002

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    DESI DR2 results II: Measurements of baryon acoustic os- cillations and cosmological constraints

    DESI Collaboration. DESI DR2 results II: Measurements of baryon acoustic os- cillations and cosmological constraints. Physical Review D, 112:083515, 2025. arXiv:2503.14738

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter.International Journal of Modern Physics D, 10:213–224, 2001

    Michel Chevallier and David Polarski. Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter.International Journal of Modern Physics D, 10:213–224, 2001. arXiv:gr- qc/0009008

    arXiv 2001

  4. [4]

    Eric V. Linder. Exploring the expansion history of the universe.Physical Review Letters, 90:091301, 2003. arXiv:astro- ph/0208512

    arXiv 2003

  5. [5]

    Extended dark energy analysis using DESI DR2 BAO measurements.Physical Review D, 112:083511, 2025

    DESI Collaboration. Extended dark energy analysis using DESI DR2 BAO measurements.Physical Review D, 112:083511, 2025. arXiv:2503.14743

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Toomey, Gabriele Montefal- cone, Evan McDonough, and Katherine Freese

    Michael W. Toomey, Gabriele Montefal- cone, Evan McDonough, and Katherine Freese. How theory-informed priors af- fect DESI evidence for evolving dark en- ergy.Physical Review D, 113:123532,

  7. [7]

    Evolving dark energy or supernovae systematics?Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 538:875–882, 2025

    George Efstathiou. Evolving dark energy or supernovae systematics?Monthly No- tices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 538:875–882, 2025. arXiv:2408.07175

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    Turyshev

    Slava G. Turyshev. Dark energy af- ter DESI DR2: Observational status, reconstructions, and physical models. Physical Review D, 113:103540, 2026. arXiv:2602.05368

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  9. [9]

    Dinda and Roy Maartens

    Bikash R. Dinda and Roy Maartens. Physical versus phantom dark energy af- ter DESI: Thawing quintessence in a curved background.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 542(1):L31–L35, 2025

    2025

  10. [10]

    Phantom-crossing dark energy and the Ωm tug-of-war

    David Shlivko and Vivian Poulin. Phantom-crossing dark energy and the Ωm tug-of-war. arXiv:2603.22406v1 [astro-ph.CO], 2026

    arXiv 2026

  11. [11]

    Swagat S. Mishra. Effective phantom dark energy: What cosmological reconstruc- tion does and does not imply.Physics of the Dark Universe, page 102399, 2026. arXiv:2605.27301

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  12. [12]

    Can dark energy evolve to the phantom?Physical Re- view D, 71:023515, 2005

    Alexander Vikman. Can dark energy evolve to the phantom?Physical Re- view D, 71:023515, 2005. arXiv:astro- ph/0407107. 18

    arXiv 2005

  13. [13]

    Saridakis, Mo- hammad R

    Yi-Fu Cai, Emmanuel N. Saridakis, Mo- hammad R. Setare, and Jun-Qing Xia. Quintom cosmology: Theoretical implica- tions and observations.Physics Reports, 493:1–60, 2010. arXiv:0909.2776

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  14. [14]

    Saridakis

    Yuhang Yang, Xin Ren, Bo Wang, Yi-Fu Cai, and Emmanuel N. Saridakis. Quin- tom cosmology and modified gravity af- ter DESI 2024.Science Bulletin, 69:2698– 2704, 2024. arXiv:2404.19437

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    Cline, Varun Muralidharan, and Benjamin Salewicz

    Ruiqi Chen, James M. Cline, Varun Muralidharan, and Benjamin Salewicz. Quintessential dark energy crossing the phantom divide.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2026(03):044,

    2026

  16. [16]

    Interacting dark sectors in light of DESI DR2.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 542:2936– 2942, 2025

    Rahul Shah, Purba Mukherjee, and Supratik Pal. Interacting dark sectors in light of DESI DR2.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 542:2936– 2942, 2025. arXiv:2503.21652

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Guedezounme, Bikash R

    Sêcloka L. Guedezounme, Bikash R. Dinda, and Roy Maartens. Phantom crossing or dark interaction?Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2026(01):062, 2026. arXiv:2507.18274

    arXiv 2026

  18. [18]

    Crossing the phantom divide in scalar-tensor and vector-tensor theories.Physical Review D, 113:L041301,

    Shinji Tsujikawa. Crossing the phantom divide in scalar-tensor and vector-tensor theories.Physical Review D, 113:L041301,

  19. [19]

    Quintom dark en- ergy: Future attractor and phantom crossing in light of DESI DR2 observa- tions.Physical Review D, 113:084069,

    Phusuda Thanankullaphong, Prasanta Sahoo, Prajwal Hassan Puttasiddappa, and Nandan Roy. Quintom dark en- ergy: Future attractor and phantom crossing in light of DESI DR2 observa- tions.Physical Review D, 113:084069,

  20. [20]

    Cohen, David B

    Andrew G. Cohen, David B. Kaplan, and Ann E. Nelson. Effective field theory, black holes, and the cosmological con- stant.Physical Review Letters, 82:4971– 4974, 1999. arXiv:hep-th/9803132

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  21. [21]

    A model of holographic dark en- ergy.Physics Letters B, 603:1–5, 2004

    Miao Li. A model of holographic dark en- ergy.Physics Letters B, 603:1–5, 2004. arXiv:hep-th/0403127

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  22. [22]

    Holographic dark energy.Physics Reports, 696:1–57, 2017

    Shuang Wang, Yi Wang, and Miao Li. Holographic dark energy.Physics Reports, 696:1–57, 2017. arXiv:1612.00345

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  23. [23]

    Saridakis, Kazuharu Bamba, Ratbay Myrzakulov, and Fotios K

    Emmanuel N. Saridakis, Kazuharu Bamba, Ratbay Myrzakulov, and Fotios K. Anagnostopoulos. Holo- graphic dark energy through Tsallis entropy.Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, 2018(12):012, 2018. arXiv:1806.01301

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  24. [24]

    Odintsov, and Emmanuel N

    Shin’ichi Nojiri, Sergei D. Odintsov, and Emmanuel N. Saridakis. Modified cosmol- ogy from extended entropy with varying exponent.European Physical Journal C, 79:242, 2019. arXiv:1903.03098

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  25. [25]

    Saridakis

    Emmanuel N. Saridakis. Barrow holo- graphic dark energy.Physical Review D, 102:123525, 2020. arXiv:2005.04115

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  26. [26]

    Saridakis

    Spyros Basilakos, Andreas Lymperis, Maria Petronikolou, and Emmanuel N. Saridakis. Barrow holographic dark energy with varying exponent.Nu- clear Physics B, 1015:116904, 2025. arXiv:2312.15767

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Dąbrowski, and Vincenzo Salzano

    Ilim Çimdiker, Mariusz P. Dąbrowski, and Vincenzo Salzano. Generalized nonex- tensive entropy holographic dark energy models verified by cosmological data.Eu- ropean Physical Journal C, 85:775, 2025. arXiv:2503.18230

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    Ibarbo-Perlaza, J

    Pedro M. Ibarbo-Perlaza, J. Bayron Orjuela-Quintana, Jose L. Palacios- Córdoba, and César A. Valenzuela- 19 Toledo. Inconsistencies of Tsallis cosmol- ogy within horizon thermodynamics and holographic scenarios.Physical Review D, 113:063518, 2026. arXiv:2510.00234

    arXiv 2026

  29. [29]

    Impact of the infrared cut- off on structure formation in Tsallis holo- graphic dark energy.Physical Review D, 113:123531, 2026

    Biswajit Das. Impact of the infrared cut- off on structure formation in Tsallis holo- graphic dark energy.Physical Review D, 113:123531, 2026. arXiv:2604.21490

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  30. [30]

    Revisiting holographic dark energy after DESI 2024.Euro- pean Physical Journal C, 85:608, 2025

    Tian-Nuo Li, Yun-He Li, Guo-Hong Du, Peng-Ju Wu, Lu Feng, Jing-Fei Zhang, and Xin Zhang. Revisiting holographic dark energy after DESI 2024.Euro- pean Physical Journal C, 85:608, 2025. arXiv:2411.08639

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    Confronting holographic dark energy with the latest cosmologicaldata: Tensionsandmodelvi- ability.Monthly Notices of the Royal As- tronomical Society, 547(3):stag365, 2026

    Devaraja Mallesha Naik. Confronting holographic dark energy with the latest cosmologicaldata: Tensionsandmodelvi- ability.Monthly Notices of the Royal As- tronomical Society, 547(3):stag365, 2026

    2026

  32. [32]

    Observational chal- lenges to holographic and Ricci dark en- ergy paradigms: Insights from ACT DR6 and DESI DR2

    Peng-Ju Wu, Tian-Nuo Li, Guo-Hong Du, and Xin Zhang. Observational chal- lenges to holographic and Ricci dark en- ergy paradigms: Insights from ACT DR6 and DESI DR2. arXiv:2509.02945 [astro- ph.CO], 2025

    arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Sari- dakis

    Giuseppe Gaetano Luciano, Andronikos Paliathanasis, and Emmanuel N. Sari- dakis. Constraints on Barrow and Tsal- lis holographic dark energy from DESI DR2 BAO data.Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 49:100427, 2026. arXiv:2506.03019

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  34. [34]

    Causality problem in a holographic dark energy model

    Hyeong-Chan Kim, Jae-Weon Lee, and Jungjai Lee. Causality problem in a holographic dark energy model. Europhysics Letters, 102:29001, 2013. arXiv:1208.3729

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  35. [35]

    Stephen D. H. Hsu. Entropy bounds and dark energy.Physics Letters B, 594:13–16,

  36. [36]

    Sayahian Jahromi, S

    A. Sayahian Jahromi, S. A. Moosavi, H. Moradpour, J. P. Morais Graça, I. P. Lobo, I. G. Salako, and A. Jawad. Generalized entropy formalism and a new holographic dark energy model. Physics Letters B, 780:21–24, 2018. arXiv:1802.07722

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  37. [37]

    Odintsov, and Tanmoy Paul

    Shin’ichi Nojiri, Sergei D. Odintsov, and Tanmoy Paul. Barrow entropic dark energy: A member of general- ized holographic dark energy family. Physics Letters B, 825:136844, 2022. arXiv:2112.10159

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  38. [38]

    Theareaofaroughblack hole.Physics Letters B, 808:135643, 2020

    JohnD.Barrow. Theareaofaroughblack hole.Physics Letters B, 808:135643, 2020. arXiv:2004.09444

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  39. [39]

    Bekenstein

    Jacob D. Bekenstein. Generalized sec- ond law of thermodynamics in black-hole physics.Physical Review D, 9:3292–3300, 1974

    1974

  40. [40]

    Paul C. W. Davies. Cosmological horizons and the generalized second law of thermo- dynamics.Classical and Quantum Grav- ity, 4:L225–L228, 1987

    1987

  41. [41]

    Constantino Tsallis and Leonardo J. L. Cirto. Black hole thermodynamical en- tropy.European Physical Journal C, 73:2487, 2013. arXiv:1202.2154

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  42. [42]

    Yu. L. Bolotin, V. V. Yanovsky, and D. A. Yerokhin. Cosmographic connec- tion between cosmological and Planck scales: The Barrow–Tsallis entropy. arXiv:2602.12077v3, 2026

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  43. [43]

    Carazzone

    Thomas Appelquist and J. Carazzone. Infrared singularities and massive fields. Physical Review D, 11:2856–2861, 1975

    1975

  44. [44]

    Berges, N

    J. Berges, N. Tetradis, and C. Wet- terich. Non-perturbative renormalization 20 flow in quantum field theory and statisti- cal physics.Physics Reports, 363:223–386,

  45. [45]

    Barrow, Spyros Basilakos, and Emmanuel N

    John D. Barrow, Spyros Basilakos, and Emmanuel N. Saridakis. Big bang nu- cleosynthesis constraints on Barrow en- tropy.Physics Letters B, 815:136134,

  46. [46]

    Bar- row cosmology and big-bang nucleosyn- thesis.Physical Review D, 111:043518,

    Ahmad Sheykhi and Ava Shahbazi. Bar- row cosmology and big-bang nucleosyn- thesis.Physical Review D, 111:043518,

  47. [47]

    Hernández- Almada, Miguel A

    Genly Leon, Juan Magaña, A. Hernández- Almada, Miguel A. García-Aspeitia, Tomás Verdugo, and V. Motta. Bar- row entropy cosmology: An observational approach with a hint of stability anal- ysis.Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics, 2021(12):032, 2021. arXiv:2108.10998

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  48. [48]

    Odintsov, and Shinji Tsujikawa

    Shin’ichi Nojiri, Sergei D. Odintsov, and Shinji Tsujikawa. Properties of singular- ities in the (phantom) dark energy uni- verse.Physical Review D, 71:063004,

  49. [49]

    Böh- mer, Sante Carloni, Edmund J

    Sebastian Bahamonde, Christian G. Böh- mer, Sante Carloni, Edmund J. Copeland, Wei Fang, and Nicola Tamanini. Dy- namical systems applied to cosmol- ogy: Dark energy and modified grav- ity.Physics Reports, 775–777:1–122, 2018. arXiv:1712.03107

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  50. [50]

    Thermodynamics of an accelerated expanding universe.Physical Review D, 74:083520, 2006

    Bin Wang, Yungui Gong, and Elcio Ab- dalla. Thermodynamics of an accelerated expanding universe.Physical Review D, 74:083520, 2006. arXiv:gr-qc/0511051

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  51. [51]

    The generalized second law of thermodynamics in the accelerat- ing universe.Physics Letters B, 652:86– 91, 2007

    Jia Zhou, Bin Wang, Yungui Gong, and Elcio Abdalla. The generalized second law of thermodynamics in the accelerat- ing universe.Physics Letters B, 652:86– 91, 2007. arXiv:0705.1264

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  52. [52]

    Dark energy and the generalized second law

    Germán Izquierdo and Diego Pavón. Dark energy and the generalized second law. Physics Letters B, 633:420–426, 2006. arXiv:astro-ph/0505601

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  53. [53]

    Egan and Charles H

    Chas A. Egan and Charles H. Lineweaver. A larger estimate of the entropy of the universe.The Astrophysical Journal, 710:1825–1834, 2010. arXiv:0909.3983

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  54. [54]

    Crossing the phantom di- vide: Dark energy internal degrees of free- dom.Physical Review D, 71:047301, 2005

    Wayne Hu. Crossing the phantom di- vide: Dark energy internal degrees of free- dom.Physical Review D, 71:047301, 2005. arXiv:astro-ph/0410680

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  55. [55]

    Parametrized post-Friedmann signatures of acceleration in the CMB

    Wayne Hu. Parametrized post-Friedmann signatures of acceleration in the CMB. Physical Review D, 77:103524, 2008. arXiv:0801.2433

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  56. [56]

    Crossing the phantom divide with parameterized post-Friedmann dark en- ergy.Physical Review D, 78:087303, 2008

    Wenjuan Fang, Wayne Hu, and Antony Lewis. Crossing the phantom divide with parameterized post-Friedmann dark en- ergy.Physical Review D, 78:087303, 2008. arXiv:0808.3125

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  57. [57]

    Structure formation with gen- eralized dark matter.The Astrophysical Journal, 506:485–495, 1998

    Wayne Hu. Structure formation with gen- eralized dark matter.The Astrophysical Journal, 506:485–495, 1998. arXiv:astro- ph/9801234

    arXiv 1998

  58. [58]

    Jochen Weller and Antony M. Lewis. Large scale cosmic microwave background anisotropies and dark energy.Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical So- ciety, 346:987–993, 2003. arXiv:astro- ph/0307104

    arXiv 2003

  59. [59]

    Probing dark energy perturbations: The dark en- ergy equation of state and speed of sound 21 as measured by WMAP.Physical Re- view D, 69:083503, 2004

    Rachel Bean and Olivier Doré. Probing dark energy perturbations: The dark en- ergy equation of state and speed of sound 21 as measured by WMAP.Physical Re- view D, 69:083503, 2004. arXiv:astro- ph/0307100

    arXiv 2004

  60. [60]

    Crossing the phantom divide.Physical Review D, 74:123503, 2006

    Martin Kunz and Domenico Sapone. Crossing the phantom divide.Physical Review D, 74:123503, 2006. arXiv:astro- ph/0609040

    arXiv 2006

  61. [61]

    Per- turbations of the quintom models of dark energy and the effects on observa- tions.Physical Review D,72:123515, 2005

    Gong-Bo Zhao, Jun-Qing Xia, Mingzhe Li, Bo Feng, and Xinmin Zhang. Per- turbations of the quintom models of dark energy and the effects on observa- tions.Physical Review D,72:123515, 2005. arXiv:astro-ph/0507482. 22

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  62. [2002]

    arXiv:hep-ph/0005122

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  63. [2004]

    arXiv:hep-th/0403052

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  64. [2005]

    arXiv:hep-th/0501025

    Pith/arXiv arXiv