Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 57 references

Three different FLRW connections in f(Q,C) gravity collapse to one cosmology once the connection equations are solved with vanishing integration constant, making the theory equivalent to f(R).

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

2026-07-11 06:24 UTC pith:U52SDSDZ

load-bearing objection Clean structural result: the connection equations force a degenerate f(R)-equivalent sector where all three FLRW connections coincide; the non-degenerate numerics are honest but preliminary. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.05521 v1 pith:U52SDSDZ submitted 2026-07-06 gr-qc astro-ph.COhep-phhep-th

Degenerate and connection-dependent cosmological sectors in f(Q,C) gravity

Ismael Ayuso This is my paper
classification gr-qc astro-ph.COhep-phhep-th
keywords f(Q,C) gravitysymmetric teleparallel gravityFLRW connectionsconnection field equationsdegenerate cosmological sectornonmetricityboundary term C
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.

Symmetric teleparallel f(Q,C) gravity encodes gravity in nonmetricity Q and a boundary term C that together recover the usual Ricci scalar. Homogeneous isotropic cosmologies allow three distinct affine connections that, a priori, should produce three different expansion histories. The paper shows that the connection field equations force a simple constraint: when their integration constant vanishes, the allowed functions of Q and C reduce to an f(R)-type form, the free connection function drops out, and all three branches yield identical background equations. That is the degenerate cosmological sector. Outside it, when the constant is nonzero, each connection remains distinct, the connection itself becomes an extra dynamical degree of freedom, and numerical models can track or gently deviate from standard expansion histories while still conserving energy-momentum. The result matters because it tells cosmologists when the choice of connection is pure gauge and when it can generate new late-time phenomenology.

Core claim

When the connection field equations are solved with vanishing integration constant, f(Q,C) is forced into the form g(Q+C) plus a linear term in (Q-C). In that sector the three FLRW-compatible connections produce identical modified Friedmann equations and the theory is dynamically equivalent to f(R) gravity. Only when the constant is nonzero does the choice of connection become physically relevant and introduce extra dynamical degrees of freedom.

What carries the argument

The connection field equation C_t=0, integrated once to give ḟ_Q - ḟ_C equal to a constant over a power of the scale factor (or involving the free connection function). Setting that constant to zero forces f(Q,C)=g(Q+C)+k/2(Q-C) and collapses the three branches.

Load-bearing premise

Matter is assumed to couple only to the metric, so there is no hypermomentum; without that assumption the connection equations and the claimed degeneracy change.

What would settle it

Construct an explicit f(Q,C) with nonzero integration constant that still satisfies the connection equation for one of the non-trivial FLRW connections, integrate the background equations, and check whether the resulting Hubble history is observationally distinguishable from both f(R) and the other two connections.

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

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 FLRW cosmology in symmetric teleparallel f(Q,C) gravity for the three affine connections compatible with cosmological symmetries. It shows that the connection field equations integrate to ḟ_Q − ḟ_C = α_0/a^n (n = 3 or 5 depending on the branch). When α_0 = 0 this forces f = g(Q+C) + (k/2)(Q−C), making the three connection branches share identical background equations and rendering the theory dynamically equivalent to f(R̊) gravity—a degenerate cosmological sector. Analytic de Sitter solutions are obtained for polynomial and exponential models in that sector. For α_0 ≠ 0 the degeneracy is lifted; a representative model f = Q + α QC is integrated numerically for all three connections and compared qualitatively to ΛCDM and CPL benchmarks.

Significance. If correct, the result cleanly organizes the landscape of f(Q,C) cosmology: a large, previously under-appreciated class of models is not connection-dependent at the background level and is equivalent to f(R̊), while genuine connection dependence requires a nonzero integration constant and introduces extra dynamical degrees of freedom. The derivation of the constraint from C_t = 0 and the subsequent collapse of the three branches is algebraically transparent and model-independent within the pure-metric-coupling sector. The analytic vacuum structure (polynomial and exponential) and the explicit numerical systems for Connections II and III provide a concrete starting point for later observational and stability analyses. The work is a useful structural contribution rather than a finished phenomenological model.

major comments (2)
  1. Sec. V and the abstract claim that the non-degenerate sector yields “novel cosmological phenomenology” and “sufficient phenomenological flexibility” to address tensions. The numerical evidence consists of exploratory integrations with Ω_m and h_0 fixed to DESI ΛCDM values and with free (α, α_0, γ_0, γ′_0) chosen by hand (Figs. 2–5). No likelihood comparison, no early-universe (BBN/CMB) consistency check, and no linear-stability analysis of the extra connection modes are provided. The structural degeneracy result does not depend on these plots, but the stronger phenomenological claims should be substantially toned down or deferred to a dedicated observational study.
  2. Sec. III, after Eqs. (32) and (43): the paper notes that α_0 ≠ 0 “generally requires a nontrivial tuning between f(Q,C) and γ.” For the specific model f = Q + α QC the system is closed and solved dynamically, which is fine, but the manuscript never states under what conditions a generic f admits regular solutions with α_0 ≠ 0 without fine-tuning the functional form. A short existence/regularity discussion (or an explicit statement that only specially chosen f are treated) would make the scope of the non-degenerate sector clearer.
minor comments (6)
  1. Title of Sec. III and several headings show spacing artifacts (“COSMOLOGY INf(Q, C)GRA VITY”, “SYMMETRIC TELEP ARALLEL”). These are almost certainly PDF-extraction issues but should be cleaned in the production version.
  2. Eq. (55): the exponential model is written without the linear (Q−C) piece; a one-sentence remark that this corresponds to k = 0 would avoid confusion with the general form (45).
  3. Figs. 1–5: the dimensionless parameters α̃, α̃_0, γ̃ are defined in the text, but the figure captions do not restate the units or the fixed matter content; adding a short reminder would improve readability.
  4. Sec. II, after Eq. (13): vanishing hypermomentum is stated once. Given that it is the key assumption that makes C_λ = 0 guarantee energy-momentum conservation, a brief forward reference in the conclusions would help readers who skip the formalism.
  5. Connection I is repeatedly said to be “identical” to f(T,B) cosmology. A short citation pointer to the precise f(T,B) equations being matched would make the comparison sharper.
  6. In Eq. (48) and the subsequent rewrite (51), the condition Q+C ≠ 0 is noted parenthetically; it would be useful to state explicitly what happens on the Q+C = 0 locus (if anything nontrivial).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the degenerate-sector claim is an algebraic consequence of the connection equations, not an input renamed as a result.

full rationale

The paper’s central structural result—that α0=0 forces f(Q,C)=g(Q+C)+k/2(Q−C), collapses the three FLRW-compatible connections to identical background equations, and yields dynamical equivalence to f(R̊)—is obtained by integrating the connection field equations Ct=0 (Eqs. 32 and 43) and substituting into the metric equations (Sec. III). Q+C is connection-independent once the constraint holds; the linear (Q−C) piece is STEGR; the remainder is ordinary f(R̊). That chain is self-contained and does not assume the target equivalence. The three admissible connections themselves follow from geometric symmetry requirements (flatness, torsion-free, FLRW Killing vectors), not from a self-cited uniqueness theorem that forbids alternatives. Numerical Hubble curves in Sec. V fix matter parameters and h0 to external DESI ΛCDM/CPL benchmarks for qualitative illustration; the paper explicitly treats them as exploratory comparisons, not as fitted-then-repredicted quantities. Self-citations to the author’s earlier f(Q) work are present but are not load-bearing for the degeneracy derivation. No self-definitional loop, fitted-input-as-prediction, or ansatz-smuggled-via-citation step appears in the load-bearing chain. Score 0 is therefore the correct, proportionate finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central degeneracy claim rests on standard symmetric-teleparallel geometry plus the modeling choice of vanishing hypermomentum and the three FLRW-compatible connections already derived in the literature. Free parameters appear only in the illustrative models and numerical explorations, not in the structural theorem itself. No new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (5)
  • α (QC coupling) = exploratory values ~0.001–0.1 in dimensionless units
    Dimensionful constant controlling the mixed QC interaction in the non-degenerate model f=Q+αQC; scanned by hand in Sec. V.
  • α0 (connection integration constant) = 0 or exploratory ~0.001–0.1
    Integration constant of the connection field equation; set to zero for the degenerate sector, nonzero and scanned for the non-degenerate sector.
  • γ0, γ′0 (or γ∗0, γ∗′0) = hand-chosen (e.g. γ0=1, γ′0=−1,0,1,…)
    Initial values of the free connection function and its derivative at the chosen epoch a0; free data for Connections II and III.
  • k, n (polynomial model)
    Coefficients in the analytic f=(Q+C)^n + k/2(Q−C) family used for de Sitter solutions.
  • α, β (exponential model)
    Amplitude and scale of the exponential correction in f=Q+C+α e^{−β(Q+C)}−2Λ.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Affine connection is torsion-free and curvature-free (symmetric teleparallel geometry).
    Stated at the opening of Sec. II; defines the geometric arena.
  • domain assumption Matter has vanishing hypermomentum (no direct coupling to the connection).
    Imposed when deriving the connection field equations Cλ=0 (Sec. II after Eq. 12); without it conservation and the constraint structure change.
  • domain assumption FLRW isometries plus flat torsion-free conditions admit exactly three inequivalent connection branches Γ(I), Γ(II), Γ(III).
    Taken from the literature (Refs. [32,34]) and reproduced in Sec. III; the entire three-sector analysis rests on this classification.
  • domain assumption Energy-momentum is that of a perfect fluid with standard continuity equation once the connection equations hold.
    Used throughout Secs. III–V to close the system.
  • standard math Standard variational calculus and index contractions for nonmetricity scalars.
    Background mathematical toolkit of metric-affine gravity.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 26907 in / 3189 out tokens · 32553 ms · 2026-07-11T06:24:10.893378+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate cosmological solutions in $f(Q,C)$ gravity formulated within symmetric teleparallel geometry, where gravitation is described by the nonmetricity scalar $Q$ and the boundary term $C$, related to the Ricci scalar of General Relativity through $\mathring{R}=Q+C$ in the absence of curvature and torsion. The symmetry requirements of FLRW spacetime admit three distinct realizations of the affine connection, leading in principle to three different cosmological sectors within the same theory. We show that the connection field equations play a crucial role in determining the cosmological dynamics. In their simplest realization, these equations impose a constraint that renders the theory dynamically equivalent to $f(\mathring{R})$ gravity, causing the cosmological background equations associated with the three connection realizations to coincide. This defines a degenerate cosmological sector of $f(Q,C)$ gravity, in which three a priori distinct geometric constructions converge to the same cosmological dynamics. We then consider the complementary class of genuinely nonequivalent $f(Q,C)$ models, for which the choice of connection becomes physically relevant. In this regime, the connection sector introduces additional dynamical degrees of freedom and gives rise to novel cosmological phenomenology absent in $f(\mathring{R})$ gravity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.05521 by Ismael Ayuso.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Cosmological evolution of the dimensionless Hubble function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Numerical solutions for the Hubble function and Connection II obtained by fixing the initial conditions at the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Numerical solutions for Connection II obtained by imposing the initial conditions at the earlier epoch [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Numerical solutions for Connection III. Top panels: the parameters are fixed to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Numerical solutions for Connection III obtained by imposing the initial conditions at the earlier epoch [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.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

57 extracted references · 39 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Connection I For the connection Γ(I) the nonmetricity scalar and the boundary term read: Q=−6H 2 ,(22) C= 6(3H 2 + ˙H),(23) whereHis the Hubble function defined asH≡˙a/a. The no null field equations are: 1 2 f+ 3H2 − Q 2 fQ − 1 2 Cf C + 3H ˙fC =κρ ,(24) −1 2 f+ −3H2 −2 ˙H+ Q 2 fQ + 1 2 Cf C −2H ˙fQ − ¨fC =κp .(25) The remaining field equations, including ...

  2. [2]

    (30), which follows from variations with respect to the connection and is not automatically satisfied

    Connection II For the connection Γ(II), the nonmetricity scalar and the boundary term read [32]: Q=−6H 2 + 9γH+ 3 ˙γ ,(26) C= 6(3H 2 + ˙H)−9γH−3 ˙γ .(27) The equations of motion that are not trivially satisfied in this case are: 1 2 f+ 3H2 − Q 2 fQ − 1 2 Cf C + 3 2 γ ˙fQ − ˙fC + 3H ˙fC =κρ ,(28) −1 2 f+ −3H2 −2 ˙H+ Q 2 fQ + 1 2 Cf C + 3 2 γ ˙fQ − ˙fC −2H ...

  3. [3]

    Connection III It is possible to simplify the equations obtained for this case through a redefinition in the components of the connection such as γ∗ = γ/a2, in a manner analogous to [ 43]. Then, for the connection Γ (III) the nonmetricity scalar and the boundary term reads: Q=−6H 2 + 3 a2 (γH+ ˙γ) = 3 3Hγ ∗ + ˙γ∗ −2H 2 ,(37) C= 6 3H2 + ˙H − 3 a2 (γH+ ˙γ) ...

  4. [4]

    In addition, we consider vacuum configurations withρ= 0 andp= 0

    Maximally symmetric solutions We focus on maximally symmetric solutions by imposing a constant Hubble parameter, H = H0. In addition, we consider vacuum configurations withρ= 0 andp= 0. Then, Eqs. (28) and (29) take the same form: 6H2 0 k−12 nH2n 0 (n−2) = 0,(53) with three possible solutions: •H 0 = 0. This solution corresponds to a static spacetime with...

  5. [5]

    ERDF A way of making Europe

    Maximally symmetric solutions As for the polynomial case, we consider maximally symmetric solutions by imposing a constant Hubble parameter, H=H 0, in vacuum withρ= 0 andp= 0. Then, Eqs. (28) and (29) takes the same form: 3H2 0 + α 2 e−12H 2 0 β 1 + 6H2 0 β −Λ = 0.(57) Unlike the polynomial case, the Minkowski branch is no longer automatically recovered. ...

    doi:10.13039/501100011033

  6. [6]

    E. Abdallaet al., Cosmology intertwined: A review of the particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies, JHEAp34, 49 (2022), arXiv:2203.06142 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  7. [7]

    Di Valentinoet al.(CosmoVerse Network), The CosmoVerse White Paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics, Phys

    E. Di Valentinoet al.(CosmoVerse Network), The CosmoVerse White Paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics, Phys. Dark Univ.49, 101965 (2025), arXiv:2504.01669 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), DESI DR2 results

    M. Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints, Phys. Rev. D112, 083515 (2025), arXiv:2503.14738 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Di Valentino, O

    E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Melchiorri, D. F. Mota, A. G. Riess, and J. Silk, In the realm of the Hubble tension—a review of solutions, Class. Quant. Grav.38, 153001 (2021), arXiv:2103.01183 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  10. [10]

    Akramiet al.(CANTATA),Modified Gravity and Cosmology

    Y. Akramiet al.(CANTATA),Modified Gravity and Cosmology. An Update by the CANTATA Network, edited by E. N. Saridakis, R. Lazkoz, V. Salzano, P. Vargas Moniz, S. Capozziello, J. Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, M. De Laurentis, and G. J. Olmo (Springer, 2021) arXiv:2105.12582 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  11. [11]

    Capozziello and M

    S. Capozziello and M. De Laurentis, Extended Theories of Gravity, Phys. Rept.509, 167 (2011), arXiv:1108.6266 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  12. [12]

    Clifton, P

    T. Clifton, P. G. Ferreira, A. Padilla, and C. Skordis, Modified Gravity and Cosmology, Phys. Rept.513, 1 (2012), arXiv:1106.2476 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  13. [13]

    J. W. Maluf, The teleparallel equivalent of general relativity, Annalen Phys.525, 339 (2013), arXiv:1303.3897 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  14. [14]

    Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, L

    J. Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, L. Heisenberg, and T. Koivisto, Coincident General Relativity, Phys. Rev. D98, 044048 (2018), arXiv:1710.03116 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  15. [15]

    J. B. Jim´ enez, L. Heisenberg, and T. S. Koivisto, The Geometrical Trinity of Gravity, Universe5, 173 (2019), arXiv:1903.06830 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  16. [16]

    Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, L

    J. Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, L. Heisenberg, T. S. Koivisto, and S. Pekar, Cosmology inf(Q) geometry, Phys. Rev. D101, 103507 (2020), arXiv:1906.10027 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    Lazkoz, F

    R. Lazkoz, F. S. N. Lobo, M. Ortiz-Ba˜ nos, and V. Salzano, Observational constraints of f(Q) gravity, Phys. Rev. D100, 104027 (2019), arXiv:1907.13219 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  18. [18]

    C. G. Boiza, M. Petronikolou, M. Bouhmadi-L´ opez, and E. N. Saridakis, Addressing H 0 and S 8 tensions within f(Q) cosmology, JCAP12, 011, arXiv:2505.18264 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  19. [19]

    Ayuso, R

    I. Ayuso, R. Lazkoz, and V. Salzano, Observational constraints on cosmological solutions of f(Q) theories, Phys. Rev. D 103, 063505 (2021), arXiv:2012.00046 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  20. [20]

    Sahlu, A

    S. Sahlu, A. de la Cruz-Dombriz, and A. Abebe, Structure growth in f (Q) cosmology, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.539, 690 (2025), arXiv:2405.07361 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Ayuso, R

    I. Ayuso, R. Lazkoz, and J. P. Mimoso, DGP and DGP-like cosmologies from f(Q) actions, Phys. Rev. D105, 083534 (2022), arXiv:2111.05061 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    Murtaza, A

    G. Murtaza, A. De, T.-H. Loo, Y. K. Goh, and H. H. Liew, Phase-space analysis of an anisotropic universe in f(Q,C) gravity, Annals Phys.480, 170086 (2025), arXiv:2505.08274 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Samaddar and S

    A. Samaddar and S. S. Singh, Cosmological dynamics and thermodynamic behavior in f(Q,C) gravity: An analytical and observational approach, Phys. Dark Univ.47, 101792 (2025)

    2025

  24. [24]

    Artola, I

    M. Artola, I. Ayuso, R. Lazkoz, G. Olmo, and V. Salzano, Geometric acceleration in f(Q, C) theories, Phys. Dark Univ.50, 102180 (2025), arXiv:2510.27415 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Sharif, M

    M. Sharif, M. Zeeshan Gul, and M. H. Shahid, Cosmological implications and ghost dark energy model in f(Q,C) gravity, High Energy Dens. Phys.55, 101185 (2025)

    2025

  26. [26]

    S. D. Sadatian and S. M. R. Hosseini, Cosmological inflation in the modified gravity model f(Q,C), Phys. Dark Univ.47, 101737 (2025)

    2025

  27. [27]

    J. T. S. S. Junior, F. S. N. Lobo, and M. E. Rodrigues, Black holes and regular black holes in coincident f(Q,B Q) gravity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 332 (2024), arXiv:2402.02534 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    De and A

    A. De and A. Paliathanasis, Exact cosmological solutions in non-coincidence f(Q)-theory, (2025), arXiv:2509.14174 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    S. A. Narawade, S. V. Lohakare, and B. Mishra, Stable f(Q) gravity model through non-trivial connection, Annals Phys. 474, 169913 (2025), arXiv:2408.12846 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Y. Yang, X. Ren, B. Wang, Y.-F. Cai, and E. N. Saridakis, Data reconstruction of the dynamical connection function in f(Q) cosmology, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.533, 2232 (2024), arXiv:2404.12140 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    Paliathanasis, Testing non-coincident f(Q)-gravity with DESI DR2 BAO and GRBs, Phys

    A. Paliathanasis, Testing non-coincident f(Q)-gravity with DESI DR2 BAO and GRBs, Phys. Dark Univ.49, 101993 (2025), arXiv:2504.11132 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Paliathanasis, Dynamical analysis of fQ-cosmology, Phys

    A. Paliathanasis, Dynamical analysis of fQ-cosmology, Phys. Dark Univ.41, 101255 (2023), arXiv:2304.04219 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  33. [33]

    Shabani, A

    H. Shabani, A. De, and T.-H. Loo, Phase-space analysis of a novel cosmological model in f(Q) theory, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 535 (2023), arXiv:2304.02949 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  34. [34]

    Dutta, W

    J. Dutta, W. Khyllep, S. Chakraborty, D. Gregoris, and K. Karwan, A Unified Dynamical Systems Framework for Cosmology inf(Q) Gravity: Generic Features Beyond the Coincident Gauge, (2025), arXiv:2508.09530 [gr-qc]. 19

    arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Paliathanasis, Attractors inf(Q, B)-gravity, Phys

    A. Paliathanasis, Attractors inf(Q, B)-gravity, Phys. Dark Univ.45, 101519 (2024)

    2024

  36. [36]

    Shabani, A

    H. Shabani, A. De, and T.-H. Loo, The cosmological significance of boundary term in non-metricity gravity, Nucl. Phys. B 1017, 116965 (2025), arXiv:2406.13189 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Shabani and A

    H. Shabani and A. De, Cosmological Scenarios in f(Q, C) gravity with a dynamical degree of freedom, (2025), arXiv:2509.24562 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    J¨ arv, M

    L. J¨ arv, M. R¨ unkla, M. Saal, and O. Vilson, Nonmetricity formulation of general relativity and its scalar-tensor extension, Phys. Rev. D97, 124025 (2018), arXiv:1802.00492 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  39. [39]

    D’Ambrosio, L

    F. D’Ambrosio, L. Heisenberg, and S. Kuhn, Revisiting cosmologies in teleparallelism, Class. Quant. Grav.39, 025013 (2022), arXiv:2109.04209 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  40. [40]

    De, T.-H

    A. De, T.-H. Loo, and E. N. Saridakis, Non-metricity with boundary terms:f(Q,C) gravity and cosmology, JCAP03, 050, arXiv:2308.00652 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  41. [41]

    Hohmann, L

    M. Hohmann, L. J¨ arv, M. Krˇ sˇ s´ ak, and C. Pfeifer, Modified teleparallel theories of gravity in symmetric spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D100, 084002 (2019), arXiv:1901.05472 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  42. [42]

    Bahamonde, K

    S. Bahamonde, K. F. Dialektopoulos, C. Escamilla-Rivera, G. Farrugia, V. Gakis, M. Hendry, M. Hohmann, J. Levi Said, J. Mifsud, and E. Di Valentino, Teleparallel gravity: from theory to cosmology, Rept. Prog. Phys.86, 026901 (2023), arXiv:2106.13793 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    Bahamonde, C

    S. Bahamonde, C. G. B¨ ohmer, and M. Wright, Modified teleparallel theories of gravity, Phys. Rev. D92, 104042 (2015), arXiv:1508.05120 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  44. [44]

    Paliathanasis and G

    A. Paliathanasis and G. Leon, f(T,B) gravity in a Friedmann–Lemaˆ ıtre–Robertson–Walker universe with nonzero spatial curvature, Math. Methods Appl. Sci.46, 3905 (2023), arXiv:2201.12189 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  45. [45]

    Caruana, G

    M. Caruana, G. Farrugia, and J. Levi Said, Cosmological bouncing solutions in f(T, B) gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C80, 640 (2020), arXiv:2007.09925 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  46. [46]

    Farrugia, J

    G. Farrugia, J. Levi Said, V. Gakis, and E. N. Saridakis, Gravitational Waves in Modified Teleparallel Theories, Phys. Rev. D97, 124064 (2018), arXiv:1804.07365 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  47. [47]

    A. R. P. Moreira, J. E. G. Silva, F. C. E. Lima, and C. A. S. Almeida, Thick brane in f(T,B) gravity, Phys. Rev. D103, 064046 (2021), arXiv:2101.10054 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  48. [48]

    Ayuso, M

    I. Ayuso, M. Bouhmadi-L´ opez, C.-Y. Chen, X. Y. Chew, K. Dialektopoulos, and Y. C. Ong, Insights in f(Q) cosmology: the relevance of the connection, (2025), arXiv:2506.03506 [gr-qc]

    arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    S. D. Odintsov, D. S´ aez-Chill´ on G´ omez, and G. S. Sharov, Is exponential gravity a viable description for the whole cosmological history?, Eur. Phys. J. C77, 862 (2017), arXiv:1709.06800 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  50. [50]

    Jaime, M

    L. Jaime, M. Salgado, and L. Patino, Cosmology in (R) exponential gravity, Springer Proc. Phys.157, 363 (2014), arXiv:1211.0015 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  51. [51]

    D’Onofrio, S

    S. D’Onofrio, S. Odintsov, and T. Schiavone, Exponential f(R) cosmology with massive neutrinos as a dynamical dark energy framework, (2025), arXiv:2511.06924 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Ayuso, J

    I. Ayuso, J. P. Mimoso, and N. J. Nunes, What if Newton’s Gravitational Constant Was Negative?, Galaxies7, 38 (2019), arXiv:1903.07604 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  53. [53]

    Fujii and K.-i

    Y. Fujii and K.-i. Maeda,The Scalar-Tensor Theory of Gravitation(Cambridge University Press, 2003)

    2003

  54. [54]

    Dodelson,Modern Cosmology(Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2003)

    S. Dodelson,Modern Cosmology(Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2003)

    2003

  55. [55]

    R. J. Scherrer, Mapping the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder parametrization onto Physical Dark Energy Models, Phys. Rev. D 92, 043001 (2015), arXiv:1505.05781 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  56. [56]

    Gomez, S

    F. Gomez, S. Lepe, V. C. Orozco, and P. Salgado, Cosmology in 5D and 4D Einstein–Gauss–Bonnet gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 906 (2022), arXiv:2207.09558 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  57. [57]

    Ashtekar and B

    A. Ashtekar and B. Gupt, Generalized effective description of loop quantum cosmology, Phys. Rev. D92, 084060 (2015), arXiv:1509.08899 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015