Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Horndeski theory, the most general single-field scalar-tensor theory with second-order field equations, can be redefined by two axioms: closure under invertible pure disformal transformations and containment of the minimal seed action; the

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 21:25 UTC pith:SJ6APII2

load-bearing objection A provocative new characterization of Horndeski, with a genuine new derivation of the AAK2 term, but the load-bearing uniqueness claim is not proven and likely false as stated. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2511.15423 v5 pith:SJ6APII2 submitted 2025-11-19 gr-qc astro-ph.COhep-th

A New Definition of Horndeski Theory and the Possibility of Multiple Scalar Field Extensions

Tomoki Katayama This is my paper
classification gr-qc astro-ph.COhep-th
keywords Horndeski theoryscalar-tensor theorydisformal transformationmulti-scalar fieldbi-HorndeskiAllys-Akama-Kobayashi termsgeneralized Galileonsecond-order field equations
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.

The paper proposes a new, action-independent definition of Horndeski theory: a scalar-tensor theory is Horndeski iff it is closed under invertible pure disformal transformations and contains the minimal seed αX + R + βG^{μν}φ_{μν}. The author argues these axioms uniquely identify the standard Horndeski action up to boundary terms, turning the usual 'most general second-order equations' property into a derived consequence. The motivation is practical: the conventional definition has stalled for multi-field systems, where only bi-Horndeski equations are known and no general action has been constructed. Extending the two axioms to two fields (with a minimal bi-disformal seed) automatically generates the antisymmetric Allys–Akama–Kobayashi term L_AAK2, suggesting a constructive route to multi-Horndeski actions without solving the full second-order EOM problem.

Core claim

The central claim is that Horndeski theory can be characterized without writing down its full Lagrangian: the two axioms of closure under invertible pure disformal transformations and inclusion of the minimal Horndeski seed αX + R + βG^{μν}φ_{μν} single out the standard action S_H up to boundary terms. Under this definition, the second-order nature of the equations of motion is a consequence, not a postulate. The paper further claims that the same scheme extends naturally to multiple fields: applying an invertible pure bi-disformal map to a minimal two-field seed, with β^I = 0 and up to L4, yields the antisymmetric Allys–Akama–Kobayashi term L_AAK2—a multi-field structure that standard multi

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the invertible pure disformal transformation (a frame change g_{μν} → A(φ)g_{μν} + B(φ)φ_μφ_ν, with A ≠ 0 and A − 2BX ≠ 0) together with the minimal Horndeski seed αX + R + βG^{μν}φ_{μν}. The two axioms use the seed as an anchor to select the correct disformal closure class, since other theories such as degenerate higher-order scalar-tensor classes also contain disformally closed subclasses. The construction algorithm, called the generalized disformal mapping method, iterates: apply an invertible pure disformal transformation to the current action, then promote the coefficient functions to arbitrary functions while preserving differential relations inherited from t

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on the premise that the two axioms uniquely select Horndeski theory—that no other theory class closed under invertible pure disformal transformations contains the minimal seed αX + R + βG^{μν}φ_{μν}—and that the iterative construction terminates exactly at the Horndeski action; this uniqueness is asserted but not proven.

What would settle it

Construct a non-Horndeski action (for example, by applying an invertible pure disformal transformation to a degenerate higher-order scalar-tensor theory) that contains the minimal seed and is closed under the same transformations; if such an action exists, the definition fails to single out Horndeski. Alternatively, compute the full two-field action generated by the bi-disformal map with β^I ≠ 0 up to L5 and compare its equations of motion with the known bi-Horndeski equations—any mismatch would falsify Conjecture 1.

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

If this is right

  • The standard single-field Horndeski action is recovered from the two axioms up to boundary terms, so the usual second-order equations of motion become a theorem rather than a definition.
  • For two fields, the antisymmetric Allys–Akama–Kobayashi term L_AAK2 emerges directly from the disformal transformation rule, showing that multi-field intrinsic structures need not be added by hand.
  • Because the construction works directly on actions, it gives a practical way to write down candidate bi-Horndeski actions whose equations can be checked against the known bi-Horndeski field equations.
  • If the paper's Conjecture 1 holds, the same two-axiom definition extends to three or more fields without requiring the full solution of the second-order EOM problem.
  • The rank of the antisymmetric terms is tied to the number of fields: L_AAK2 already appears at N = 2, while L_AAK3 requires N ≥ 3 and is absent in the two-field analysis.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The anchor-based characterization suggests a broader classification scheme: choosing a different minimal seed within a disformally closed class could define sibling healthy theories, turning disformal closure into a tool for generating new scalar-tensor theories rather than only recovering Horndeski.
  • The iteration in the generalized disformal mapping method is asserted to terminate at the Horndeski action but is not proven; establishing termination and uniqueness rigorously would make the definition fully constructive.
  • The paper restricts to β^I = 0 and up to L4 for the two-field case, so it does not yet test whether the new definition reproduces the complete bi-Horndeski physics; closing that gap is the natural next step.
  • If the definition succeeds, multi-field Horndeski construction becomes a problem about extending disformal transformations, potentially connecting to classification of disformal frame-invariant theories.

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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a new characterization of Horndeski theory, replacing the standard 'most general second-order field equations' definition with two axioms: (i) closure under invertible pure disformal transformations and (ii) containment of a 'minimal Horndeski theory' αX+R+βGμνφμν (Sec. 4.1). The author claims this definition uniquely recovers the standard single-field Horndeski action up to boundary terms, and that the same two-axiom scheme can be extended to multiple scalar fields, leading to a bi-Horndeski theory that naturally contains the Allys–Akama–Kobayashi antisymmetric terms (Sec. 5.3). The constructive algorithm ('generalized disformal mapping method') is outlined in Appendix A, and the relation to DHOST classes is discussed in Appendix B.

Significance. If the central uniqueness claim were established, the paper would offer a genuinely new and elegant characterization of Horndeski theory, with a practical constructive route to multi-field generalizations that have so far resisted a full action-level derivation. The paper is transparent about several limitations: it explicitly labels the multi-field generalization as a conjecture, acknowledges that DHOST theory contains multiple disformally closed classes, and admits in Appendix A.2 that the anchor term was chosen with foreknowledge of the final Horndeski action. These admissions are commendable, but they underline that the main claim is not yet proven. The multi-field result is presented as a compelling demonstration rather than a complete derivation, and the paper cites detailed prior calculations [56,66] rather than providing all intermediate steps. Overall, the idea is promising and worth pursuing, but the current version overstates what has been established.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1, Definition 1] The assertion that the definition 'uniquely identifies' S_H is not proven and, as stated, appears false. Appendix B acknowledges that DHOST theory contains multiple classes closed under invertible disformal transformations. The 'disformal Horndeski' class contains the anchor αX+R+βGμνφμν via the identity transformation; if that class is closed under full disformal transformations, it is also closed under pure disformal transformations, and it is strictly larger than Horndeski. Thus the two axioms are satisfied by a proper superset. A minimality or 'generated-by' condition must be added, together with a proof that the closure of the anchor under pure disformal transformations terminates exactly at S_H, or the DHOST counterexample must be excluded explicitly.
  2. [Appendix A.1] The 'structure-preserving generalization' step is not a well-defined mathematical operation. The relation f_i = a ∂X f_j is schematic, and 'promoting' f_i to F_i while preserving differential relations does not specify which functions are promoted, in which order, or why the resulting class is unique. The fixed-point condition S_{n+1}=S_n is asserted for two examples only (A.3–A.5), not proven in general. Moreover, Appendix A.2 states that the βGμνφμν seed was added because the author already knew the complete Horndeski action; the construction is therefore answer-guided rather than a derivation from the axioms. This undermines the uniqueness claim in §4.1.
  3. [§5.3 and Appendix D] The claim that the bi-Horndeski action (5.3) with L_extra = L_AAK2 emerges naturally from the new definition is not fully demonstrated. The calculation in Appendix D applies a bi-disformal transformation to the Einstein–Hilbert action, keeps only 'minimal necessary terms', and refers to prior work [56,66] for the single-field case. It shows the schematic form (D.3) and the relation (D.4), but it does not show that the generalized disformal mapping algorithm applied to the multi-field seed terminates at the stated action, nor that the resulting class is closed. Since Conjecture 1 is explicitly non-trivial and the paper sets β^I=0 and truncates at L4, the bi-Horndeski result should be presented as a conjecture or worked example, not as a consequence of the definition.
minor comments (5)
  1. [General] The abstract and body switch between 'two mild axioms' and 'three mild axioms' (the abstract in the text says 'three' in one version and 'two' in another); the definition in §4.1 lists two conditions. Please harmonize.
  2. [Eq. (3.7)] The index structure of L_add appears typographically inconsistent: the δ-symbol indices do not match the contraction pattern described in the text. Please check and correct.
  3. [Eq. (5.4)] The term proportional to H_[IJ][KL],⟨MN⟩ contains the products ϕ^M_{β1β3} ϕ^N_{β2β4}, which is likely a typo for a symmetric or specific index arrangement consistent with L_AAK2 in Eq. (3.9). Please verify.
  4. [Appendix A.2] The notation S_2, S_3, S'_2, S'_3 is used without a clear rule for when primes are introduced. A more systematic notation would help readability.
  5. [Miscellaneous] Several uses of 'Chapter' should be 'Section'; the paper also refers to 'Appendix A' for the algorithm but the details are in A.1–A.2. Minor wording points do not affect the substance.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged

Single-field 'recovery' is partly circular: App. A.1 builds in the second-order-EOM property and App. A.2 seeds the construction from the known S_H; the AAK2 computation itself is not circular.

specific steps
  1. self definitional [Appendix A.1 (Generalized Disformally Mapping Method)]
    "An essential aspect is that the coefficients are not fully generalized independently; rather, they are extended in a manner that preserves the differential structure mandated by the definition. Consequently, within this framework, the actions obtained do not introduce higher-order differential terms in the equations of motion, thereby avoiding Ostrogradsky-type instabilities."

    The new definition (Sec. 4.1) explicitly makes 'most general equations of motion up to second order' a derived property, not part of the definition. Yet the generating algorithm's 'structure-preserving generalization' is chosen so that no higher-order differential terms appear, which is precisely the conventional Horndeski-defining property. Thus the recovery of S_H is not an independent consequence of the two axioms; the target property is wired into the update rule, so the derived action is equivalent to the input ansatz.

  2. self definitional [Appendix A.2; c.f. Sec. 4.1 Definition 2]
    "Therefore, introducing terms already contained in L5 is convenient for us, who already know the complete action of Horndeski theory. Thus, we add βGμνφμν as the minimal additional term."

    The 'minimal Horndeski' anchor in Definition 2 is a piece of the target action S_H, selected because the complete Horndeski action was already known. The paper then claims the axioms 'uniquely identify' S_H, but the uniqueness is never proved and the anchor is doing the selection. The claimed recovery therefore reduces to the choice of a seed taken from the object being 'identified'.

full rationale

The paper is transparent about its constructive intent: Sec. 6 says the definition is 'constructed to yield the same action as the conventional Horndeski theory,' and Conjecture 1 is explicitly labeled non-trivial and unproved. The multi-field AAK2 derivation in Appendix D is a genuine computation from the bi-disformal map and is not a fitted parameter call, so it does not add circularity. No load-bearing self-citation chain is present: the only self-reference is [63], a future-work placeholder, not a supporting theorem. However, the central single-field claim 'the action established by this definition is uniquely identified as S_H' is not established independently. Appendix A.1 selects a generalization rule that preserves the no-higher-order-EOM structure, which is exactly the conventional Horndeski property that the new definition claims to derive; and Appendix A.2 admits the anchor seed was chosen with foreknowledge of the complete Horndeski action. Appendix B further concedes that multiple DHOST classes are closed under invertible pure disformal transformations, so the anchor is doing the uniqueness work without a proof. These features make the single-field 'recovery' partially circular, although the multi-field calculation itself is independent. Overall score 6: some predictions reduce by construction while other parts retain independent content.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities and fits no data; its load-bearing content is a set of structural axioms and one hand-made truncation. The main inputs are: disformal closure (standard, cited to [56,57]); the anchor seed, whose βGμνφμν term was added explicitly because the author already knows the complete Horndeski action and wants convenient termination (App A.2); the termination of the iterative algorithm, demonstrated only by example; two stated-but-unshown algebraic identities (D.4; C.3-C.5); and Conjecture 1, the unproven keystone of the multi-field claim. The free constants α, β, α_IJ of the seed are theory inputs, not fitted values; the only hand-made numerical simplification is β^I=0.

free parameters (1)
  • β^I truncation in bi-Horndeski construction = β^I = 0 (L5 sector omitted)
    Sec 5.3: 'since we are specifically considering up to L4, we set β^I = 0 and L5 is not being treated, because this simplification makes the calculation tractable while preserving the essential structure.' The bi-Horndeski result (5.4) is therefore explicitly not the full theory; the L5 sector is out of scope.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Invertible pure disformal transformations (g→Ag+Bφμφν, A≠0, A−2BX≠0) send Horndeski actions to Horndeski actions up to boundary terms.
    Sec 2.2 (eqs. 2.3-2.5), cited to [56,57]; this is the closure property that forms Axiom 1 of Definition 1, used verbatim in the multi-field extension (5.1).
  • ad hoc to paper The anchor condition (containing αX+R+βGμνφμν) is sufficient to single out the Horndeski class among disformally-closed classes.
    Sec 4.1 (footnote 5) and App B: asserted but not proven; App B concedes DHOST contains multiple classes closed under invertible disformal transformations, so the anchor must do the selecting, yet its sufficiency is not demonstrated.
  • ad hoc to paper The generalized disformal mapping algorithm terminates (S_{n+1}=S_n) at finite n, and the fixed point has second-order field equations.
    App A.1-A.2: termination is shown only for the two chosen seeds; no proof that the procedure cannot generate new structures, and the claim that the structure-preserving generalization avoids Ostrogradsky instabilities is asserted without proof.
  • domain assumption Algebraic identities in App D, including (-√D D^IJ D^KL/A),⟨MN⟩ = √D D^IJ D^KL D^MN/A and D^IJ,KL = 2D^IK D^JL.
    App D, eq. (D.4) and surrounding text: stated as 'verifiable through calculation' but not shown; these relations are what promote the AAK2 coefficients to arbitrary functions H_[IJ][KL].
  • domain assumption L_AAK1 + L_AAK3 can be rewritten as α' + β'_I □φ^I, hence belong to L2+L3.
    App C, eqs. (C.3)-(C.5): attributed to 'simple calculations' with support from [48]; used to argue that only L_AAK2 needs explicit verification.
  • ad hoc to paper Conjecture 1: the multi-field version of the new definition yields the most general second-order equations of motion.
    Sec 5.2: explicitly labeled a non-trivial conjecture whose validity 'is not guaranteed a priori'; the entire multi-field program rests on this unproven premise.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 12488 in / 27688 out tokens · 253860 ms · 2026-08-03T21:25:26.712860+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

In the single-field case, Horndeski provides the most general scalar-tensor theory with second-order field equations. By contrast, systematic multi-field extensions remain incomplete: while the general field equations for the bi-Horndeski case are known, a general action has not been established, and for cases with three or more fields, neither a general action nor general equations are available. We characterize Horndeski theory by three mild axioms: closure under invertible pure disformal transformations, the inclusion of a minimal Horndeski theory as an anchor, and the requirement that the coefficient functions of the Lagrangian be arbitrary up to relations required by the closure. Under this characterization, we recover the standard single-field action up to boundary terms and obtain a practical path to multi-field constructions. In particular, we show that antisymmetric structures, such as those identified by E. Allys, S. Akama, and T. Kobayashi, appear within this framework, and indicate that this viewpoint has the potential to account for features captured by known bi-Horndeski equations.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Effective geometrodynamics for renormalization-group improved black-hole spacetimes in spherical symmetry

    gr-qc 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    RG-improved black hole spacetimes with scale-dependent gravitational coupling are derived as vacuum solutions to 2D Horndeski master field equations, embedding prior works and exposing implementation discrepancies.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 57 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Fujii and K.-i

    Y. Fujii and K.-i. Maeda,The scalar-tensor theory of gravitation, Cambridge University Press (2003)

    2003

  2. [2]

    Baumann,Inflation, inTheoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: Physics of the Large and the Small, pp

    D. Baumann,Inflation, inTheoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: Physics of the Large and the Small, pp. 523–686, 2011, DOI [0907.5424]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  3. [3]

    Copeland, M

    E.J. Copeland, M. Sami and S. Tsujikawa,Dynamics of dark energy,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D15(2006) 1753 [hep-th/0603057]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  4. [4]

    Ratra and P.J.E

    B. Ratra and P.J.E. Peebles,Cosmological Consequences of a Rolling Homogeneous Scalar Field,Phys. Rev. D37(1988) 3406

    1988

  5. [5]

    Wetterich,Cosmology and the Fate of Dilatation Symmetry,Nucl

    C. Wetterich,Cosmology and the Fate of Dilatation Symmetry,Nucl. Phys. B302(1988) 668 [1711.03844]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1988

  6. [6]

    Caldwell, R

    R.R. Caldwell, R. Dave and P.J. Steinhardt,Cosmological imprint of an energy component with general equation of state,Phys. Rev. Lett.80(1998) 1582 [astro-ph/9708069]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  7. [7]

    Zlatev, L.-M

    I. Zlatev, L.-M. Wang and P.J. Steinhardt,Quintessence, cosmic coincidence, and the cosmological constant,Phys. Rev. Lett.82(1999) 896 [astro-ph/9807002]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  8. [8]

    Armendariz-Picon, V.F

    C. Armendariz-Picon, V.F. Mukhanov and P.J. Steinhardt,Essentials of k essence,Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 103510 [astro-ph/0006373]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  9. [9]

    Deffayet, G

    C. Deffayet, G. Esposito-Farese and A. Vikman,Covariant Galileon,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 084003 [0901.1314]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  10. [10]

    Deffayet, S

    C. Deffayet, S. Deser and G. Esposito-Farese,Generalized Galileons: All scalar models whose curved background extensions maintain second-order field equations and stress-tensors,Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 064015 [0906.1967]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  11. [11]

    De Felice and S

    A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa,Cosmology of a covariant Galileon field,Phys. Rev. Lett.105(2010) 111301 [1007.2700]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  12. [12]

    Deffayet, O

    C. Deffayet, O. Pujolas, I. Sawicki and A. Vikman,Imperfect Dark Energy from Kinetic Gravity Braiding,JCAP10(2010) 026 [1008.0048]. – 10 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  13. [13]

    Langlois,Dark energy and modified gravity in degenerate higher-order scalar–tensor (DHOST) theories: A review,Int

    D. Langlois,Dark energy and modified gravity in degenerate higher-order scalar–tensor (DHOST) theories: A review,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D28(2019) 1942006 [1811.06271]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  14. [14]

    Ostrogradsky,M´ emoires sur les ´ equations diff´ erentielles, relatives au probl` eme des isop´ erim` etres, Mem

    M. Ostrogradsky,M´ emoires sur les ´ equations diff´ erentielles, relatives au probl` eme des isop´ erim` etres, Mem. Acad. St. Petersbourg6(1850) 385

  15. [15]

    Woodard,Ostrogradsky’s theorem on Hamiltonian instability,Scholarpedia10(2015) 32243 [1506.02210]

    R.P. Woodard,Ostrogradsky’s theorem on Hamiltonian instability,Scholarpedia10(2015) 32243 [1506.02210]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  16. [16]

    Kobayashi,Horndeski theory and beyond: a review,Rept

    T. Kobayashi,Horndeski theory and beyond: a review,Rept. Prog. Phys.82(2019) 086901 [1901.07183]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  17. [17]

    Lin,Resolving the Ostrogradsky Ghost Problem for a Class of Scalar-tensor Theories,1702.00696

    C. Lin,Resolving the Ostrogradsky Ghost Problem for a Class of Scalar-tensor Theories,1702.00696

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  18. [18]

    Sivanesan,Generalized multiple-scalar field theory in Minkowski space-time free of Ostrogradski ghosts,Phys

    V. Sivanesan,Generalized multiple-scalar field theory in Minkowski space-time free of Ostrogradski ghosts,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 104006 [1307.8081]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  19. [19]

    Nicolis, R

    A. Nicolis, R. Rattazzi and E. Trincherini,The Galileon as a local modification of gravity,Phys. Rev. D 79(2009) 064036 [0811.2197]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  20. [20]

    Horndeski,Second-order scalar-tensor field equations in a four-dimensional space,Int

    G.W. Horndeski,Second-order scalar-tensor field equations in a four-dimensional space,Int. J. Theor. Phys.10(1974) 363

    1974

  21. [21]

    Deffayet, X

    C. Deffayet, X. Gao, D.A. Steer and G. Zahariade,From k-essence to generalised Galileons,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 064039 [1103.3260]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  22. [22]

    Kobayashi, M

    T. Kobayashi, M. Yamaguchi and J. Yokoyama,Generalized G-inflation: Inflation with the most general second-order field equations,Prog. Theor. Phys.126(2011) 511 [1105.5723]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  23. [23]

    Gleyzes, D

    J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza and F. Vernizzi,Essential Building Blocks of Dark Energy,JCAP08 (2013) 025 [1304.4840]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  24. [24]

    Gleyzes, D

    J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza and F. Vernizzi,Healthy theories beyond Horndeski,Phys. Rev. Lett. 114(2015) 211101 [1404.6495]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  25. [25]

    Langlois and K

    D. Langlois and K. Noui,Degenerate higher derivative theories beyond Horndeski: evading the Ostrogradski instability,JCAP02(2016) 034 [1510.06930]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  26. [26]

    Ben Achour, D

    J. Ben Achour, D. Langlois and K. Noui,Degenerate higher order scalar-tensor theories beyond Horndeski and disformal transformations,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 124005 [1602.08398]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  27. [27]

    Crisostomi, K

    M. Crisostomi, K. Koyama and G. Tasinato,Extended Scalar-Tensor Theories of Gravity,JCAP04 (2016) 044 [1602.03119]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  28. [28]

    Ben Achour, M

    J. Ben Achour, M. Crisostomi, K. Koyama, D. Langlois, K. Noui and G. Tasinato,Degenerate higher order scalar-tensor theories beyond Horndeski up to cubic order,JHEP12(2016) 100 [1608.08135]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  29. [29]

    Takahashi, M

    K. Takahashi, M. Minamitsuji and H. Motohashi,Generalized disformal Horndeski theories: Cosmological perturbations and consistent matter coupling,PTEP2023(2023) 013E01 [2209.02176]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  30. [30]

    Takahashi, M

    K. Takahashi, M. Minamitsuji and H. Motohashi,Effective description of generalized disformal theories, JCAP07(2023) 009 [2304.08624]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    Cheung, P

    C. Cheung, P. Creminelli, A.L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan and L. Senatore,The Effective Field Theory of Inflation,JHEP03(2008) 014 [0709.0293]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  32. [32]

    Gubitosi, F

    G. Gubitosi, F. Piazza and F. Vernizzi,The Effective Field Theory of Dark Energy,JCAP02(2013) 032 [1210.0201]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  33. [33]

    Gleyzes, D

    J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois and F. Vernizzi,A unifying description of dark energy,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D23 (2015) 1443010 [1411.3712]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  34. [34]

    Langlois, M

    D. Langlois, M. Mancarella, K. Noui and F. Vernizzi,Effective Description of Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor Theories,JCAP05(2017) 033 [1703.03797]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  35. [35]

    Frusciante and L

    N. Frusciante and L. Perenon,Effective field theory of dark energy: A review,Phys. Rept.857(2020) 1 [1907.03150]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    observations et al.,Cosmological gravity probes: Connecting recent theoretical developments to forthcoming observations,PTEP2023(2023) 072E01 [2212.09094]

    C.r.t.d.t.f. observations et al.,Cosmological gravity probes: Connecting recent theoretical developments to forthcoming observations,PTEP2023(2023) 072E01 [2212.09094]. – 11 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    De Felice and S

    A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa,Generalized Galileon cosmology,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 124029 [1008.4236]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  38. [38]

    Yamauchi, S

    D. Yamauchi, S. Yokoyama and H. Tashiro,Constraining modified theories of gravity with the galaxy bispectrum,Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 123516 [1709.03243]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  39. [39]

    Langlois, R

    D. Langlois, R. Saito, D. Yamauchi and K. Noui,Scalar-tensor theories and modified gravity in the wake of GW170817,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 061501 [1711.07403]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  40. [40]

    Yamauchi and N.S

    D. Yamauchi and N.S. Sugiyama,Second-order peculiar velocity field as a novel probe of scalar-tensor theories,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 063515 [2108.02382]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  41. [41]

    Yamauchi, S

    D. Yamauchi, S. Ishimaru, T. Matsubara and T. Takahashi,Skewness consistency relation in large-scale structure and test of gravity theory,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 043526 [2211.13453]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  42. [42]

    Sugiyama, D

    N.S. Sugiyama, D. Yamauchi, T. Kobayashi, T. Fujita, S. Arai, S. Hirano et al.,New constraints on cosmological modified gravity theories from anisotropic three-point correlation functions of BOSS DR12 galaxies,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.523(2023) 3133 [2302.06808]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    Yamashita, T

    S. Yamashita, T. Matsubara, T. Takahashi and D. Yamauchi,Kurtosis consistency relation in large-scale structure as a probe of gravity theories,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 123503 [2407.01221]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  44. [44]

    Ohashi, N

    S. Ohashi, N. Tanahashi, T. Kobayashi and M. Yamaguchi,The most general second-order field equations of bi-scalar-tensor theory in four dimensions,JHEP07(2015) 008 [1505.06029]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  45. [45]

    Horndeski,Second-Order Bi-Scalar-Tensor Field Equations in a Space of Four-Dimensions, 2405.08303

    G.W. Horndeski,Second-Order Bi-Scalar-Tensor Field Equations in a Space of Four-Dimensions, 2405.08303

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  46. [46]

    Kobayashi, N

    T. Kobayashi, N. Tanahashi and M. Yamaguchi,Multifield extension ofGinflation,Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 083504 [1308.4798]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  47. [47]

    Allys,New terms for scalar multi-Galileon models and application to SO(N) and SU(N) group representations,Phys

    E. Allys,New terms for scalar multi-Galileon models and application to SO(N) and SU(N) group representations,Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 064051 [1612.01972]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  48. [48]

    Akama and T

    S. Akama and T. Kobayashi,Generalized multi-Galileons, covariantized new terms, and the no-go theorem for nonsingular cosmologies,Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 064011 [1701.02926]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  49. [49]

    K. Aoki, Y. Manita and S. Mukohyama,Shift-symmetricSO(N) multi-Galileon,JCAP12(2021) 045 [2110.05510]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  50. [50]

    Lovelock,The Einstein tensor and its generalizations,J

    D. Lovelock,The Einstein tensor and its generalizations,J. Math. Phys.12(1971) 498

    1971

  51. [51]

    Lovelock,The four-dimensionality of space and the einstein tensor,J

    D. Lovelock,The four-dimensionality of space and the einstein tensor,J. Math. Phys.13(1972) 874. [52]DESIcollaboration,DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations,JCAP02(2025) 021 [2404.03002]. [53]DESIcollaboration,DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constrai...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1972

  52. [54]

    Efstathiou, W.J

    G. Efstathiou, W.J. Sutherland and S.J. Maddox,The cosmological constant and cold dark matter, Nature348(1990) 705

    1990

  53. [55]

    Bekenstein,The Relation between physical and gravitational geometry,Phys

    J.D. Bekenstein,The Relation between physical and gravitational geometry,Phys. Rev. D48(1993) 3641 [gr-qc/9211017]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  54. [56]

    Bettoni and S

    D. Bettoni and S. Liberati,Disformal invariance of second order scalar-tensor theories: Framing the Horndeski action,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 084020 [1306.6724]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  55. [57]

    Zumalac´ arregui and J

    M. Zumalac´ arregui and J. Garc ´ ıa-Bellido,Transforming gravity: from derivative couplings to matter to second-order scalar-tensor theories beyond the Horndeski Lagrangian,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 064046 [1308.4685]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  56. [58]

    Gleyzes, D

    J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza and F. Vernizzi,Exploring gravitational theories beyond Horndeski, JCAP02(2015) 018 [1408.1952]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  57. [59]

    Padilla and V

    A. Padilla and V. Sivanesan,Covariant multi-galileons and their generalisation,JHEP04(2013) 032 [1210.4026]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  58. [60]

    Langlois, S

    D. Langlois, S. Renaux-Petel, D.A. Steer and T. Tanaka,Primordial perturbations and non-Gaussianities in DBI and general multi-field inflation,Phys. Rev. D78(2008) 063523 [0806.0336]. – 12 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  59. [61]

    Renaux-Petel, S

    S. Renaux-Petel, S. Mizuno and K. Koyama,Primordial fluctuations and non-Gaussianities from multifield DBI Galileon inflation,JCAP11(2011) 042 [1108.0305]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  60. [62]

    Dom` enech, A

    G. Dom` enech, A. Ganz and A. Tsabodimos,On the consistent disformal couplings to fermions, 2510.07419

    arXiv

  61. [63]

    Katayama,in preparation, 202X

    T. Katayama,in preparation, 202X

  62. [64]

    Watanabe, A

    Y. Watanabe, A. Naruko and M. Sasaki,Multi-disformal invariance of non-linear primordial perturbations,EPL111(2015) 39002 [1504.00672]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  63. [65]

    Firouzjahi, M.A

    H. Firouzjahi, M.A. Gorji, S.A. Hosseini Mansoori, A. Karami and T. Rostami,Two-field disformal transformation and mimetic cosmology,JCAP11(2018) 046 [1806.11472]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  64. [66]

    Alinea,On the Disformal Transformation of the Einstein-Hilbert Action,J

    A.L. Alinea,On the Disformal Transformation of the Einstein-Hilbert Action,J. Phys.16(2024) 507 [2010.00956]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  65. [67]

    Langlois,Degenerate Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor (DHOST) theories, in52nd Rencontres de Moriond on Gravitation, pp

    D. Langlois,Degenerate Higher-Order Scalar-Tensor (DHOST) theories, in52nd Rencontres de Moriond on Gravitation, pp. 221–228, 2017 [1707.03625]. – 13 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017