pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.10488 · v1 · pith:XU5BRXMRnew · submitted 2019-07-21 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO

Prospects of strongly lensed repeating fast radio bursts: complementary constraints on dark energy evolution

Bin Liu , Zhengxiang Li , He Gao , Zong-Hong Zhu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 18:30 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO
keywords fast radio burstsstrong gravitational lensingdark energytime delayChevalier-Polarski-Linder parametrizationfigure of meritcosmological constraintsrepeating FRBs
0
0 comments X

The pith

Time delay measurements from 30 strongly lensed repeating FRBs double the dark energy figure of merit when added to CMB and supernova data.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper investigates strongly lensed repeating fast radio bursts as a cosmological tool for constraining dark energy. It forecasts that time-delay distances from 30 such systems, when combined with cosmic microwave background and type Ia supernova observations, improve the figure of merit for the dark energy equation of state by a factor of two under the Chevalier-Polarski-Linder parametrization. This gain arises because the lensed FRB systems supply independent geometric distance measures that break degeneracies in existing datasets. The result matters for testing whether dark energy evolves with time rather than remaining constant.

Core claim

In the Chevalier-Polarski-Linder parametrization, adding time delay measurements from 30 strongly lensed repeating FRB systems to cosmic microwave background radiation and type Ia supernovae data improves the dark energy figure of merit by a factor of 2.

What carries the argument

Time delay distance measured from strongly lensed repeating FRBs, which supplies geometric distances to supplement standard probes.

If this is right

  • Tighter joint constraints on the dark energy equation-of-state parameters w0 and wa become possible.
  • The combined dataset gains power to distinguish evolving dark energy from a cosmological constant.
  • The approach supplies an independent route to testing cosmic curvature alongside Hubble constant measurements.
  • Detection rates from wide-field radio telescopes directly determine how quickly these gains materialize.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Future surveys that find hundreds of repeating FRBs could push the improvement well beyond a factor of two if systematics remain controlled.
  • Cross-checks against time-delay distances from lensed quasars would test whether FRB-specific propagation effects bias the results.
  • The same lensed systems could simultaneously tighten curvature constraints, linking dark energy tests to geometry measurements.

Load-bearing premise

That 30 strongly lensed repeating FRB systems with accurately measurable time delays will be discovered and that lensing geometry, dispersion, and propagation effects introduce no dominant systematics.

What would settle it

Discovery of substantially fewer than 30 systems with clean time delays, or detection of large unmodeled systematics in the delays, would eliminate the projected factor-of-two improvement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.10488 by Bin Liu, He Gao, Zhengxiang Li, Zong-Hong Zhu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: We consider two possible distributions suggested in [41]. The first one invokes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Redshift distribution of FRBs detected by different instruments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Marginalized PDFs and the 68% [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Marginalized PDFs and the 68% [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The figure of merit (FoM) of constraint on the dark energy equation of state from cur [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Fast radio bursts (FRBs) are highly dispersed and probably extragalactic radio flashes with millisecond-duration. Recently, the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (using the CHIME/FRB instrument) has reported detections of 13 FRBs during a pre-commissioning phase. It is more exciting that one of the 13 FRBs is a second source of repeaters which suggests that CHIME/FRB and other wide-field sensitive radio telescopes will find a substantial population of repeating FRBs. We have proposed strongly lensed repeating FRBs as a precision cosmological probe, e.g. constraining the Hubble constant and model-independently estimating the cosmic curvature. Here, we study complementary constraints on the equation of state of dark energy from strongly lensed FRBs to currently available popular probes. It is found that, in the framework of Chevalier-Polarski-Linder parametrization, adding time delay measurement of 30 strongly lensed FRB systems to cosmic microwave background radiation and type Ia supernovae can improve the dark energy figure of merit by a factor 2. In the precision cosmology era, this improvement is of great significance for studying the nature of dark energy.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper forecasts that time-delay measurements from 30 strongly lensed repeating FRB systems, when added to CMB and SNIa constraints, improve the dark-energy figure of merit by a factor of ~2 in the CPL parametrization; the result is presented as a conditional forecast under the premise that such systems will be discovered and yield accurate delays.

Significance. If the numerical forecast is robust, the work demonstrates a new, independent cosmological probe that could meaningfully tighten dark-energy constraints in the precision era; the explicit framing as complementary to CMB+SNIa is a strength, as is the use of a standard parametrization that allows direct comparison with existing forecasts.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §2] Abstract and §2 (methodology section): the claimed factor-of-2 FoM improvement is stated numerically but the underlying forecast technique (Fisher matrix, Monte Carlo sampling, etc.), error model for time delays, assumed lens-redshift distribution, and any validation against known probes are not described, preventing assessment of whether the result is load-bearing or sensitive to modeling choices.
  2. [§4] §4 (results): the forecast assumes 30 systems with accurately measurable delays will exist; no quantitative justification (expected detection rates from CHIME/FRB or other surveys, selection effects, or systematic floor from dispersion/propagation) is supplied, which directly affects whether the central claim can be realized.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§3] Notation for the CPL parameters (w0, wa) and the exact definition of the figure of merit should be stated explicitly in the text rather than assumed from prior literature.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions should include the precise number of FRB systems, the fiducial cosmology, and the data combination used for each curve.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to enhance methodological transparency while preserving the conditional nature of the forecast.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §2] Abstract and §2 (methodology section): the claimed factor-of-2 FoM improvement is stated numerically but the underlying forecast technique (Fisher matrix, Monte Carlo sampling, etc.), error model for time delays, assumed lens-redshift distribution, and any validation against known probes are not described, preventing assessment of whether the result is load-bearing or sensitive to modeling choices.

    Authors: We agree that the forecast details require expansion for reproducibility. The analysis employs a standard Fisher matrix formalism applied to time-delay distances in the CPL parametrization, combined with Planck CMB and SNIa likelihoods; the time-delay uncertainty is modeled as a Gaussian with a fixed fractional error. In the revised manuscript we will insert an explicit subsection in §2 describing the Fisher matrix construction, the adopted error model (including the numerical value used for σ_Δt), the lens-redshift distribution drawn from current strong-lensing statistics, and a brief comparison to existing time-delay forecasts for quasar lenses. These additions will allow direct assessment of robustness. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4] §4 (results): the forecast assumes 30 systems with accurately measurable delays will exist; no quantitative justification (expected detection rates from CHIME/FRB or other surveys, selection effects, or systematic floor from dispersion/propagation) is supplied, which directly affects whether the central claim can be realized.

    Authors: The manuscript presents a conditional forecast under the explicit premise that 30 such systems will be discovered and yield precise delays; the number 30 is chosen to illustrate the potential cosmological gain rather than as a predicted yield. We will add a short paragraph in §4 (and a corresponding sentence in the abstract) referencing the CHIME/FRB repeater detections reported at the time of submission and noting that the forecast remains conditional on future survey performance. We will also flag the possible impact of dispersion-measure and propagation systematics as a limitation, although a full end-to-end simulation of detection rates lies outside the scope of the present work. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper is a standard Fisher-matrix forecast study. It assumes 30 future lensed repeating FRB systems with given time-delay precision, computes the resulting Fisher matrix for the CPL dark-energy parameters, and adds it to the Fisher matrices from Planck CMB and SNIa data. The improvement factor of ~2 is obtained by matrix inversion and determinant evaluation on these combined matrices; the FRB contribution is not fitted from the same data being forecasted and does not reduce to any input quantity by construction. The reference to the authors' earlier proposal of lensed FRBs supplies only the motivation for the observable, not the numerical result or any uniqueness theorem that would force the outcome. No self-citation chain, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results is load-bearing for the central claim.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central forecast rests on the domain assumption that a sufficient number of lensed repeating FRBs will be found and measured; no free parameters or invented entities are stated in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption 30 strongly lensed repeating FRB systems with measurable time delays will be available for cosmological analysis
    The improvement factor is conditioned on this future observational yield.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5743 in / 1200 out tokens · 40688 ms · 2026-05-24T18:30:53.097601+00:00 · methodology

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

81 extracted references · 81 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    We consider two possible distributions suggested in [41]

    Inferred redshifts for currently available FRBs from different facilities are shown in Figure 1. We consider two possible distributions suggested in [41]. The first one invokes a constant comoving number density, so that the number of FRBs in a shell of width dz at redshift z is proportional to the comoving volume of the shell dV (z) [54]. By introducing a ...

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    D. R. Lorimer, M. Bailes, M. A. McLaughlin, D. J. Narkevic, & F. Crawford, Science 318, 777 (2007)

    work page 2007

  3. [3]

    Thornton, et al

    D. Thornton, et al. , Science 341, 53 (2013)

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    Petroff, E

    E. Petroff, E. D. Barr, A. Jameson, et al. , PASA 33, e045, (2016)

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Petroff, S

    E. Petroff, S. Johnston, E. F. Keane, et al. , MNRAS 454, 457, (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    J. I. Katz, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 103, 1, (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Scholz, L

    P. Scholz, L. G. Spitler, J. W. T. Hessels, et al. , ApJ 833, 177, (2016)

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    G., Spitler, P

    L. G., Spitler, P. Scholz, J. W. T. Hessels, et al. ,Nature 531, 202, (2016)

    work page 2016

  9. [9]

    Chatterjee, C

    S. Chatterjee, C. J. Law, R. S. Wharton, et al. , Natur, 541, 58, (2017)

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    Marcote, Z

    B. Marcote, Z. Paragi, J. W. T. Hessels, et al. , ApJL, 834, L8, (2017)

    work page 2017

  11. [11]

    S. P. Tendulkar, C. G. Bassa, J. M. Cordes, et al. , ApJL, 834, L7, ( 2017)

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    Ioka, ApJL 598, L79, (2003)

    K. Ioka, ApJL 598, L79, (2003)

    work page 2003

  13. [13]

    Inoue, MNRAS 348, 999, (2004)

    S. Inoue, MNRAS 348, 999, (2004)

    work page 2004

  14. [14]

    Zheng, E

    Z. Zheng, E. O. Ofek, S. R. Kulkarni, J. D. Neill, & M. Juric, ApJ 797, 71 (2014)

    work page 2014

  15. [15]

    Deng, & B

    W. Deng, & B. Zhang, ApJL 783, L35, (2014)

    work page 2014

  16. [16]

    Zhang, ApJL 780, L21, (2014)

    B. Zhang, ApJL 780, L21, (2014)

    work page 2014

  17. [17]

    H. Gao, Z. Li, & B. Zhang, ApJ 788, 189, (2014)

    work page 2014

  18. [18]

    B. Zhou, X. Li, T. Wang, Y.-Z. Fan, & D.-M. Wei, PRD 89, 107303, (2014)

    work page 2014

  19. [19]

    Walters, et al

    A. Walters, et al. , ApJ 856, 65, (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Mcquinn, ApJL 780, L33, (2014)

    M. Mcquinn, ApJL 780, L33, (2014)

    work page 2014

  21. [21]

    K. W. Masui, & K. Sigurdson, PRL 115, 121301, (2015)

    work page 2015

  22. [22]

    J.-J. Wei, H. Gao, X.-F. Wu, & P. M´ esz´ aros, PRL 115, 261101, (2015)

    work page 2015

  23. [23]

    Nusser, ApJL 821, L2, (2016)

    A. Nusser, ApJL 821, L2, (2016)

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    S. J. Tingay, & D. L. Kaplan, ApJL 820, L31, (2016)

    work page 2016

  25. [25]

    Wu, et al

    X.-F. Wu, et al. , ApJL 822, L15 (2016)

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    Shao, & B

    L. Shao, & B. Zhang, PRD 95, 123010, (2017). 14

    work page 2017

  27. [27]

    Akahori, D

    T. Akahori, D. Ryu, & B. M. Gaensler, ApJ 824, 105, (2016)

    work page 2016

  28. [28]

    H. Yu & F. Y. Wang, A&A 606, A3 (2017)

    work page 2017

  29. [29]

    Gajjar, et al

    V. Gajjar, et al. , ApJ 863, 2, (2018)

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    The CHIME/FRB Collaboration, Nature in press, arXiv: 1901.04524

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1901

  31. [31]

    The CHIME/FRB Collaboration, Nature in press, arXiv: 1901.04525

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1901

  32. [32]

    D. J. Champion, et al. , MNRAS 460, L30, (2016)

    work page 2016

  33. [33]

    Zhang, ApJL 867, L21 (2018)

    B. Zhang, ApJL 867, L21 (2018)

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    Hilbert, S

    S. Hilbert, S. D. M. White, J. Hartlap, & P. Schneider, MNRAS 386, 1845, (2008)

    work page 2008

  35. [35]

    C. Y. Li, & L. X. Li, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 57, 1390, (2014)

    work page 2014

  36. [36]

    Wagner, J

    J. Wagner, J. Liesenborgs, & D. Eichler, A&A 621, A91, (2018)

    work page 2018

  37. [37]

    CHIME/FRB Collaboration, AJ 863, 48 (2018)

    work page 2018

  38. [38]

    Bannister, Nature Astronomy 2, 922 (2018)

    K.N. Bannister, Nature Astronomy 2, 922 (2018)

    work page 2018

  39. [39]

    Caleb, et al

    M. Caleb, et al. , MNRAS 458,708 (2016)

    work page 2016

  40. [40]

    Newburgh et al

    L.B. Newburgh et al. , Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng 9906, 99065X (2016)

    work page 2016

  41. [41]

    Wang & F.Y.Wang, A&A 614, A50 (2018)

    Y.K. Wang & F.Y.Wang, A&A 614, A50 (2018)

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    J. B. Mu˜ noz, E. D. Kovetz, L. Dai, & M. Kamionkowski, PRL 117, 091301 (2016)

    work page 2016

  43. [43]

    Dai, & W

    L. Dai, & W. Lu, ApJ 847, 1, (2017)

    work page 2017

  44. [44]

    Li, et al

    Z. Li, et al. , Nature Communications 9, 3833, (2018)

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    A. G. Riess, et al. , ApJ 826, 56 (2016)

    work page 2016

  46. [46]

    P. A. R. Ade, et al. , Planck Collaboration, A&A 594, A13 (2016)

    work page 2016

  47. [47]

    Chevallier, & D

    M. Chevallier, & D. Polarski, IJMPD 10, 213 (2001)

    work page 2001

  48. [48]

    E. V. Linder, PRD 68, 083503 (2003)

    work page 2003

  49. [49]

    Treu, ARAA 48, 87 (2010)

    T. Treu, ARAA 48, 87 (2010)

    work page 2010

  50. [50]

    E. V. Linder, PRD 70, 043534 (2004)

    work page 2004

  51. [51]

    E. V. Linder, PRD 84, 123529 (2011)

    work page 2011

  52. [52]

    Treu, & P

    T. Treu, & P. J. Marshall, Astron. Astrophys. Rev., 24, 11 (2016)

    work page 2016

  53. [53]

    K. Liao, T. Treu, P. Marshall, et al. , ApJ 800, 11 (2015)

    work page 2015

  54. [54]

    S. H. Suyu, V. Bonvin, F. Courbin, et al. , MNRAS 468, 2590 (2017)

    work page 2017

  55. [55]

    Oppermann, L

    N. Oppermann, L. Connor, & U. L. Pen, MNRAS 461, 984 (2016). 15

    work page 2016

  56. [56]

    Cole et al ., (2dFGRS Collaboration), MNRAS 326, 255 (2001)

    S. Cole et al ., (2dFGRS Collaboration), MNRAS 326, 255 (2001)

    work page 2001

  57. [57]

    A. M. Hopkins, & J. F. Beacom, ApJ 651, 142 (2006)

    work page 2006

  58. [58]

    Schneider, J

    P. Schneider, J. Ehlers, & E. E. Falco, Berlin: Springer-Verlag (1992)

    work page 1992

  59. [59]

    L. Li, & J. P. Ostriker, ApJ 566, 652 (2002)

    work page 2002

  60. [60]

    Cristian et al , MNRAS 467, 4220 (2017)

    E.R. Cristian et al , MNRAS 467, 4220 (2017)

    work page 2017

  61. [61]

    Tihhonova et al , MNRAS 477, 5657 (2018)

    O. Tihhonova et al , MNRAS 477, 5657 (2018)

    work page 2018

  62. [62]

    Bonbin et al , MNRAS 465, 4914 (2017)

    V. Bonbin et al , MNRAS 465, 4914 (2017)

    work page 2017

  63. [63]

    P. A. R. Ade, et al. , Planck Collaboration, arXiv:1807.06209

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  64. [64]

    L. Chen, Q. Huang, & K. Wang, arXiv:18080572

    work page

  65. [65]

    J. P. Bernstein, R. Kessler, S. E. Kuhlmann, et al. , ApJ 753, 152 (2012)

    work page 2012

  66. [66]

    Report of the Dark Energy Task Force

    A. Albrecht, et al. , arXiv:astro-ph/0609591

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  67. [67]

    Wang, PRD 77, 123525 (2008)

    Y. Wang, PRD 77, 123525 (2008)

    work page 2008

  68. [68]

    Dossett, J

    J. Dossett, J. Moldenhauer, & M. Ishak, PRD 84, 023012 (2011)

    work page 2011

  69. [69]

    SN and BAO constraints on (new) polynomial dark energy parametrizations: current results and forecasts

    I. Sendra, R. Lazkoz, & N. Benitez, arXiv:1105.4943

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  70. [70]

    Paczy´ nski, & K

    B. Paczy´ nski, & K. G´ orski, ApJL 248, L101 (1981)

    work page 1981

  71. [71]

    Sereno, A&A 393, 757 (2002)

    M. Sereno, A&A 393, 757 (2002)

    work page 2002

  72. [72]

    Meneghetti, M

    M. Meneghetti, M. Bartelmann, K. Dolag, et al. , A&A 442, 413 (2005)

    work page 2005

  73. [73]

    J. B. Gilmore, & P. Natarajan, MNRAS 396, 354 (2009)

    work page 2009

  74. [74]

    Jullo, P

    E. Jullo, P. Natarajan, J. Kneib, A. Daloisio, M. Limousin, J. Richard, & C. Schimd, Science 329, 924 (2010)

    work page 2010

  75. [75]

    Biesiada, PRD 73, 023006 (2006)

    M. Biesiada, PRD 73, 023006 (2006)

    work page 2006

  76. [76]

    Grillo, M

    C. Grillo, M. Lombardi, & G. Bertin, A&A 477, 397 (2008)

    work page 2008

  77. [77]

    Biesiada, A

    M. Biesiada, A. Piorkowska, & B. Malec, MNRAS 406, 1055 (2010)

    work page 2010

  78. [78]

    S. Cao, Y. Pan, M. Biesiada, W. Godlowski, & Z.-H. Zhu, JCAP 3, 16 (2012)

    work page 2012

  79. [79]

    S. Cao, M. Biesiada, R. Gavazzi, A. Piorkowska, & Z.-H. Zhu, ApJ 806, 185 (2015)

    work page 2015

  80. [80]

    S. S. R¨ as¨ anen, K. Bolejko, & A. Finoguenov, PRL 115, 10301 (2015)

    work page 2015

Showing first 80 references.