Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Holographic Dark Energy and Present Cosmic Acceleration

High Energy Physics - Theory · Submitted 4 Nov 2005

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim The model accounts for the aforesaid acceleration and, by construction, is free of the cosmic coincidence problem.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDhep-th/0511053 (version 1)
Pith IDVKZTJFFE, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationDiego Pavon, Winfried Zimdahl. "Holographic Dark Energy and Present Cosmic Acceleration." arXiv:hep-th/0511053 (2005). https://pith.science/paper/VKZTJFFE
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,883 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.07 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.04 · compares with prior results 0.18 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We review the notion of holographic dark energy and assess its significance in the light of the well documented cosmic acceleration at the present time. We next propose a model of holographic dark energy in which the infrared cutoff is set by the Hubble scale. The model accounts for the aforesaid acceleration and, by construction, is free of the cosmic coincidence problem.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We review the notion of holographic dark energy and assess its significance in the light of the well documented cosmic acceleration at the present time. background 0.72 0.62 0.07 asserted 0.51
s1 We next propose a model of holographic dark energy in which the infrared cutoff is set by the Hubble scale. contribution 0.76 0.91 0.10 asserted 0.98
s2 The model accounts for the aforesaid acceleration and, by construction, is free of the cosmic coincidence problem. result 0.75 0.81 0.59 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.86 · evidence from argument 0.56.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We review the notion of holographic dark energy and assess its significance in the light of the well documented cosmic acceleration at the present time. We next propose a model of holographic dark energy in which the infrared cutoff is set by the Hubble scale. The model accounts for the aforesaid acceleration and, by construction, is free of the cosmic coincidence problem.

Human review
References
How the literature uses it

1 arXiv paper cite this in 1 sentence

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.