REVIEW 2 cited by
Testing an oscillatory behavior of dark energy
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
The main aim of this work is to use a model-independent approach, along with late-time observational probes, to reconstruct the dark energy (DE) equation of state $w_{\rm DE}(z)$. Our analysis showed that, for a late time universe, $w_{\rm DE}$ deviates from being a constant but in contrast exhibits an oscillatory behavior, hence both quintessence ($w_{\rm DE}> -1$) and phantom ($w_{\rm DE} < -1$) regimes are equally allowed. In order to portray this oscillatory behavior, we explored various parametrizations for the equation of state and identified the closest approximation based on the goodness of fit with the data and the Bayesian evidence analysis. Our findings indicated that while all considered oscillating DE parametrizations provided a better fit to the data, compared to the cosmological constant, they are penalized in the Bayesian evidence analysis due to the additional free parameters. Overall, the present article demonstrates that in the low redshift regime, the equation of state of the DE prefers to be dynamical and oscillating. We anticipate that future cosmological probes will take a stand in this direction.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Monodromic Dark Energy and DESI
Monodromic k-essence fits current CMB, BAO, and supernova data about as well as w0-wa dark energy, with a nonzero oscillation amplitude preferred only by DESY5 supernovae.
-
How Holographic is the Dark Energy? A Spline Nodal reconstruction approach
A three-node spline reconstruction of holographic dark energy improves chi-squared over LambdaCDM by about 10 to 12, but Bayesian evidence gives no clear preference.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.