Visual Prompt Discovery via Semantic Exploration

Jaechang Kim; Jungseul Ok; Kuang-Da Wang; Shingo Takamatsu; Yotaro Shimose; Zhao Wang

REVIEW 3 major objections 1 minor 29 references

An automated semantic explorer finds task-wise visual prompts that fix LVLM perception failures without per-sample manual trial-and-error.

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

2026-07-13 23:52 UTC pith:TPCS273N

load-bearing objection We only have the SEVEX abstract; the attached full text is a different cosmology paper, so none of the BlindTest/BLINK claims can be audited. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2603.16250 v2 pith:TPCS273N submitted 2026-03-17 cs.CV cs.AI

Visual Prompt Discovery via Semantic Exploration

Jaechang Kim , Yotaro Shimose , Zhao Wang , Kuang-Da Wang , Jungseul Ok , Shingo Takamatsu This is my paper

classification cs.CV cs.AI

keywords visual promptslarge vision-language modelssemantic explorationSEVEXperception failurestask-wise promptingagent-driven experimentsimage manipulation

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.

Large vision-language models still fail on basic image understanding and visual reasoning. Visual prompts—code that manipulates the image before the model sees it—can reduce those failures, but prior work mostly picks among fixed tools and still depends on human trial-and-error because the models are opaque. This paper argues that the right unit of search is not low-level code or a one-off fix per image, but reusable, task-level visual strategies discovered by automated experiments. It introduces SEVEX, which searches an abstract idea space, selects candidates by novelty, and refines ideas from semantic feedback on empirical outcomes. On perception-focused benchmarks, the discovered prompts improve accuracy while cutting inference and exploration cost and raising stability, and they include counter-intuitive strategies that go beyond ordinary tool use.

Core claim

SEVEX can automatically discover task-wise visual prompts that meaningfully reduce LVLM perception failures. By treating abstract visual ideas as the search space and driving exploration with novelty selection plus semantic feedback from real model outcomes, the method outperforms baselines on BlindTest and BLINK in accuracy, inference efficiency, exploration efficiency, and stability, and surfaces sophisticated strategies that conventional tool-selection approaches miss.

What carries the argument

SEVEX: a semantic exploration loop that searches an abstract idea space (instead of raw low-level image-manipulation code), selects candidates with a novelty-guided rule, and ideates new prompts from semantic feedback on empirical results, yielding reusable task-wise visual prompts.

Load-bearing premise

That black-box trials over an abstract idea space are enough to find visual prompts that transfer across a whole task and actually address root perception failures, without needing internal diagnosis of the model.

What would settle it

Run the same exploration budget on BlindTest and BLINK with SEVEX versus strong tool-selection and per-sample baselines: if SEVEX does not raise task accuracy while also improving exploration efficiency and stability, or if the discovered prompts fail to transfer task-wise, the central claim fails.

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

If this is right

Task-level visual prompt libraries can be built once per perception task instead of regenerating prompts per image.
Agent-driven empirical search can replace much of the human trial-and-error currently used to design visual prompts.
Counter-intuitive image manipulations become usable assets for LVLM perception once discovery is automated.
Evaluation of visual prompting can shift from tool catalogs toward measured exploration efficiency and stability on perception benchmarks.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same idea-space loop could be applied to other black-box multimodal failures (e.g., OCR, spatial counting, or chart reading) where code-based input transforms are available.
If abstract-idea search is the right abstraction, hybrid systems that mix a few hand-written visual strategies with SEVEX-style expansion may outperform pure tool routers.
Persistent failure modes after SEVEX would point to perception errors that no pre-model image transform can fix, clarifying the boundary between prompt engineering and model redesign.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

We only have the SEVEX abstract; the attached full text is a different cosmology paper, so none of the BlindTest/BLINK claims can be audited.

read the letter

The one thing you need to know: the cacheable “full manuscript” is not Visual Prompt Discovery via Semantic Exploration. It is a cosmology paper on clustering dark energy with Nefertiti (fluid EoS, power spectra, halo profiles). So for 2603.16250 we effectively have an abstract only. I cannot check SEVEX, the idea-space search, novelty-guided selection, semantic feedback, or any BlindTest/BLINK numbers.

What the abstract claims is clear and, if true, useful in multimodal practice. Prior visual-prompt work is cast as tool selection or manual trial-and-error; they want task-wise (not per-sample) automated discovery via an abstract idea space plus agent-driven empirical trials, and they report gains on accuracy, inference cost, exploration efficiency, and stability, including counter-intuitive strategies. That framing is a legitimate methodological step if the body delivers it. Novelty looks incremental rather than foundational; significance is real for people who ship LVLM perception fixes, not a rewrite of learning theory.

Soft spots are not subtle method flaws—they are absence of evidence in the supplied source. No algorithm details, no ablations, no tables, no discovered prompts, no code. The load-bearing premise (black-box search in idea space can fix root perception failures under model opacity and transfer task-wise) is stated, not shown. Mild train/test leakage risk for any agent scored on the same benchmarks is normal for this genre and uncheckable here. Circularity is not structural from the abstract alone.

Who this is for: people working on visual prompting and LVLM evaluation. Right now it is not for a reading group or for citation, because the body we were given is the wrong paper. A serious editor would not send this package to referees until the correct manuscript, results, and preferably code are attached. If the real SEVEX paper matches the abstract’s claims with solid experiments, it would deserve a full review; on the present materials, it does not.

Recommendation: do not engage further until the correct full text for 2603.16250 is available. Treat the cosmology manuscript as a separate, unrelated work.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The submission is titled and abstracted as a computer-vision paper introducing SEVEX, an automated semantic-exploration framework that searches an abstract idea space (with novelty-guided selection and semantic feedback) to discover task-wise visual prompts for large vision-language models, claiming significant gains over baselines on BlindTest and BLINK in accuracy, inference efficiency, exploration efficiency, and stability, including counter-intuitive strategies beyond tool selection. The body of the manuscript actually supplied, however, is an unrelated cosmology paper presenting the first Nefertiti hydrodynamical simulations of clustering dark energy treated as an effective fluid (EoS with w and cs, continuity/Euler/Poisson system, finite-volume MUSCL-Hancock integration, power spectra, halo density profiles, and comparison to k-evolution). No SEVEX algorithm, idea-space search, visual-prompt results, or LVLM benchmarks appear in the full text.

Significance. If the abstract’s claims were substantiated by a matching manuscript, automated discovery of transferable task-wise visual prompts that mitigate root LVLM perception failures would be a useful contribution to multimodal robustness and would reduce reliance on manual trial-and-error. The supplied body instead reports a different, potentially valuable result in cosmology (stable nonlinear clustering-DE simulations without the instabilities reported for EFT scalar formulations, ~10% DE contribution inside massive halos). Because the two documents do not describe the same work, neither contribution can be properly assessed or credited under the stated title and abstract.

major comments (3)

Title/abstract vs. full text: the manuscript body is the Nefertiti clustering-dark-energy paper (fluid EoS Eq. (1), continuity/Euler Eqs. (2)–(3), Poisson Eq. (4), power spectra Figs. 1–3, halo profiles Fig. 4, slices Fig. 5, Appendices A–B). It contains no definition of SEVEX, no abstract idea space, no novelty-guided selection, no semantic feedback loop, no BlindTest/BLINK evaluation, and no visual prompts. The central claims of the abstract are therefore unsupported by any evidence in the submitted full text and cannot be refereed.
Because the body is a different paper, load-bearing elements required for the CV claims—algorithm pseudocode, search-space construction, selection/ideation criteria, baselines, ablations, statistical significance of accuracy/efficiency gains, and examples of discovered counter-intuitive prompts—are entirely absent. No revision of the cosmology text can repair this; a correct matching manuscript would be required.
Even treating the cosmology body on its own terms (if the packaging error were ignored), the abstract and title still advertise SEVEX/LVLM results, so the submission as a whole is incoherent and fails basic integrity checks for peer review.

minor comments (1)

The cosmology manuscript itself has ordinary presentation issues (e.g., ‘predictoin’ typo in Fig. 2 caption; occasional OCR/encoding artifacts in equations) that would be minor if that paper were under review under its own title.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular derivation found; SEVEX body absent and cosmology text is non-circular numerical work

full rationale

The supplied full manuscript is not the SEVEX visual-prompt paper: it is an unrelated cosmology paper on Nefertiti hydrodynamical simulations of clustering dark energy (fluid EoS, power spectra, halo profiles). That cosmology text reports numerical solutions of continuity/Euler/Poisson equations and compares nonlinear spectra to linear CAMB predictions; results are not forced by definition or by fitting the reported observables to themselves. The SEVEX abstract alone describes an empirical agent search scored by task accuracy on BlindTest/BLINK; nothing in the abstract equates a reported accuracy to a fitted objective by identity, nor imports a uniqueness theorem that forces the result. Without SEVEX equations, selection criteria, or tables, no load-bearing circular step can be exhibited. Honest finding: no significant circularity (score 0).

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 3 axioms · 1 invented entities

Abstract-only review of a methods paper. Load-bearing background is standard LVLM/tool-use practice plus the empirical premise that black-box experiments can discover transferable visual prompts. No free parameters or invented physical entities appear in the abstract; SEVEX is a named algorithm, not a new ontological entity. Full experimental assumptions (models, budgets, idea-space grammar) are missing from the provided materials.

axioms (3)

domain assumption LVLM perception failures are opaque enough that optimal visual prompts must be found by empirical experiment rather than analytical diagnosis.
Stated in the abstract as motivation for automated exploration over manual trial-and-error.
domain assumption Task-wise visual prompts (shared across samples of a task) are preferable and sufficient compared with per-sample generation.
Abstract positions avoiding per-sample generation as a design goal and efficiency claim.
ad hoc to paper An abstract idea space plus novelty-guided selection and semantic feedback can cover useful visual strategies more efficiently than unstructured code search.
Core methodological bet of SEVEX as described in the abstract; not independently justified here.

invented entities (1)

SEVEX (semantic exploration algorithm / framework) no independent evidence
purpose: Name the automated search procedure over abstract visual-prompt ideas with novelty-guided selection and semantic feedback.
Algorithmic construct introduced by the paper; independent evidence would be public code and reproducible benchmark gains, which are not in the provided materials.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 14814 in / 2595 out tokens · 39266 ms · 2026-07-13T23:52:45.394006+00:00 · methodology

0 comments

read the original abstract

LVLMs encounter significant challenges in image understanding and visual reasoning, leading to critical perception failures. Visual prompts, which incorporate image manipulation code, have shown promising potential in mitigating these issues. While emerged as a promising direction, previous methods for visual prompt generation have focused on tool selection rather than diagnosing and mitigating the root causes of LVLM perception failures. Because of the opacity and unpredictability of LVLMs, optimal visual prompts must be discovered through empirical experiments, which have relied on manual human trial-and-error. We propose an automated semantic exploration framework for discovering task-wise visual prompts. Our approach enables diverse yet efficient exploration through agent-driven experiments, minimizing human intervention and avoiding the inefficiency of per-sample generation. We introduce a semantic exploration algorithm named SEVEX, which addresses two major challenges of visual prompt exploration: (1) the distraction caused by lengthy, low-level code and (2) the vast, unstructured search space of visual prompts. Specifically, our method leverages an abstract idea space as a search space, a novelty-guided selection algorithm, and a semantic feedback-driven ideation process to efficiently explore diverse visual prompts based on empirical results. We evaluate SEVEX on the BlindTest and BLINK benchmarks, which are designed to assess LVLM perception. Experimental results demonstrate that SEVEX significantly outperforms baseline methods in task accuracy, inference efficiency, exploration efficiency, and exploration stability. Notably, our framework discovers sophisticated and counter-intuitive visual strategies that go beyond conventional tool usage, offering a new paradigm for enhancing LVLM perception through automated, task-wise visual prompts.

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 20 linked inside Pith

[1]

Chiba, T

T. Chiba, T. Okabe, and M. Yamaguchi, Phys. Rev. D 62, 023511 (2000), astro-ph/9912463

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000
[2]

Armendariz-Picon, V

C. Armendariz-Picon, V. F. Mukhanov, and P. J. Stein- hardt, Phys. Rev. D63, 103510 (2001), arXiv:astro- ph/0006373

arXiv 2001
[3]

Creminelli, M

P. Creminelli, M. A. Luty, A. Nicolis, and L. Senatore, JHEP12, 080, arXiv:hep-th/0606090

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[4]

Creminelli, G

P. Creminelli, G. D’Amico, J. Norena, and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.02, 018 (2009), arXiv:0811.0827

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009
[5]

A. G. Adameet al.(DESI), J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.02, 021 (2025), arXiv:2404.03002

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[6]

A. G. Adameet al.(DESI), J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.07, 028 (2025), arXiv:2411.12022

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[7]

Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), Phys

M. Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), Phys. Rev. D112, 083515 (2025), arXiv:2503.14738

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[8]

Creminelli, G

P. Creminelli, G. D’Amico, J. Norena, L. Senatore, and F. Vernizzi, JCAP03, 027, arXiv:0911.2701 [astro- ph.CO]

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[9]

Sefusatti and F

E. Sefusatti and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2011, 047 (2011), arXiv:1101.1026

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[10]

Gubitosi, F

G. Gubitosi, F. Piazza, and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.02, 032 (2013), arXiv:1210.0201

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013
[11]

Hassani, J

F. Hassani, J. Adamek, M. Kunz, and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2019, 011 (2019), arXiv:1910.01104. 5 � �� ...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[12]

Hassani, P

F. Hassani, P. Shi, J. Adamek, M. Kunz, and P. Wittwer, Phys. Rev. D105, L021304 (2022), arXiv:2107.14215

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022
[13]

Hassani, J

F. Hassani, J. Adamek, M. Kunz, P. Shi, and P. Wittwer, Classical and Quantum Gravity40, 155009 (2023)

2023
[14]

L. Blot, P. S. Corasaniti, and F. Schmidt, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2023, 001 (2023)

2023
[15]

Teyssier, Astronomy and Astrophysics385, 337 (2002)

R. Teyssier, Astronomy and Astrophysics385, 337 (2002)

2002
[16]

Dakin, S

J. Dakin, S. Hannestad, T. Tram, M. Knabenhans, and J. Stadel, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2019, 013 (2019), arXiv:1904.05210

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[17]

Arkani-Hamed, H.-C

N. Arkani-Hamed, H.-C. Cheng, M. A. Luty, and S. Mukohyama, JHEP05, 074, arXiv:hep-th/0312099

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[18]

Arkani-Hamed, H.-C

N. Arkani-Hamed, H.-C. Cheng, M. A. Luty, S. Muko- hyama, and T. Wiseman, JHEP01, 036, arXiv:hep- ph/0507120

arXiv
[19]

Van Leer, SIAM Journal on Scientific and statistical Computing5, 1 (1984)

B. Van Leer, SIAM Journal on Scientific and statistical Computing5, 1 (1984)

1984
[20]

Alimi, A

J.-M. Alimi, A. F¨ uzfa, V. Boucher, Y. Rasera, J. Courtin, and P.-S. Corasaniti, MNRAS401, 775 (2010), arXiv:0903.5490

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010
[21]

Prunet, C

S. Prunet, C. Pichon, D. Aubert, D. Pogosyan, R. Teyssier, and S. Gottloeber, ApJS178, 179 (2008), arXiv:0804.3536 [astro-ph]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008
[22]

P. S. Behroozi, R. H. Wechsler, and H.-Y. Wu, The As- trophysical Journal762, 109 (2012)

2012
[23]

Lewis, A

A. Lewis, A. Challinor, and A. Lasenby, ApJ538, 473 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9911177

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000
[24]

Smith, M

B. Smith, M. Turk, J. ZuHone, C. Robert, S. Skory, C. Hummels, A. Myers, K. Kowalik, C. Cadiou, eganhila, et al., yt-project/yt astro analysis: yt astro analysis 1.1.4 release (2025)

2025
[25]

M. J. Turk, B. D. Smith, J. S. Oishi, S. Skory, S. W. Skillman, T. Abel, and M. L. Norman, The As- trophysical Journal Supplement Series192, 9 (2011), arXiv:1011.3514

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[26]

Villaescusa-Navarro, Pylians: Python libraries for the analysis of numerical simulations, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1811.008 (2018), ascl:1811.008

F. Villaescusa-Navarro, Pylians: Python libraries for the analysis of numerical simulations, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1811.008 (2018), ascl:1811.008

2018
[27]

Diemer, COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cos- mology, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos (2018), arXiv:1712.04512

B. Diemer, COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cos- mology, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos (2018), arXiv:1712.04512

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[28]

Bean and O

R. Bean and O. Dor´ e, Phys. Rev. D69, 083503 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0307100

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004
[29]

D’Amico, Y

G. D’Amico, Y. Donath, L. Senatore, and P. Zhang, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2024, 032 (2024), arXiv:2012.07554. 6 Supplementary Material Appendix A: Equations In the following, we exclusively deal with dark energy fluid variables, so we continue to denoteρ≡ρ de,v≡v DE. In a generic frame, the fluid equations are [9] ∂ρ ∂τ + 3H ρ+ p c2 +∇· ρ+ p c2 v= 0,...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

[1] [1]

Chiba, T

T. Chiba, T. Okabe, and M. Yamaguchi, Phys. Rev. D 62, 023511 (2000), astro-ph/9912463

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

[2] [2]

Armendariz-Picon, V

C. Armendariz-Picon, V. F. Mukhanov, and P. J. Stein- hardt, Phys. Rev. D63, 103510 (2001), arXiv:astro- ph/0006373

arXiv 2001

[3] [3]

Creminelli, M

P. Creminelli, M. A. Luty, A. Nicolis, and L. Senatore, JHEP12, 080, arXiv:hep-th/0606090

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[4] [4]

Creminelli, G

P. Creminelli, G. D’Amico, J. Norena, and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.02, 018 (2009), arXiv:0811.0827

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

[5] [5]

A. G. Adameet al.(DESI), J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.02, 021 (2025), arXiv:2404.03002

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[6] [6]

A. G. Adameet al.(DESI), J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.07, 028 (2025), arXiv:2411.12022

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[7] [7]

Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), Phys

M. Abdul Karimet al.(DESI), Phys. Rev. D112, 083515 (2025), arXiv:2503.14738

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[8] [8]

Creminelli, G

P. Creminelli, G. D’Amico, J. Norena, L. Senatore, and F. Vernizzi, JCAP03, 027, arXiv:0911.2701 [astro- ph.CO]

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[9] [9]

Sefusatti and F

E. Sefusatti and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2011, 047 (2011), arXiv:1101.1026

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

[10] [10]

Gubitosi, F

G. Gubitosi, F. Piazza, and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.02, 032 (2013), arXiv:1210.0201

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

[11] [11]

Hassani, J

F. Hassani, J. Adamek, M. Kunz, and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2019, 011 (2019), arXiv:1910.01104. 5 � �� ...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

[12] [12]

Hassani, P

F. Hassani, P. Shi, J. Adamek, M. Kunz, and P. Wittwer, Phys. Rev. D105, L021304 (2022), arXiv:2107.14215

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

[13] [13]

Hassani, J

F. Hassani, J. Adamek, M. Kunz, P. Shi, and P. Wittwer, Classical and Quantum Gravity40, 155009 (2023)

2023

[14] [14]

L. Blot, P. S. Corasaniti, and F. Schmidt, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2023, 001 (2023)

2023

[15] [15]

Teyssier, Astronomy and Astrophysics385, 337 (2002)

R. Teyssier, Astronomy and Astrophysics385, 337 (2002)

2002

[16] [16]

Dakin, S

J. Dakin, S. Hannestad, T. Tram, M. Knabenhans, and J. Stadel, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2019, 013 (2019), arXiv:1904.05210

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

[17] [17]

Arkani-Hamed, H.-C

N. Arkani-Hamed, H.-C. Cheng, M. A. Luty, and S. Mukohyama, JHEP05, 074, arXiv:hep-th/0312099

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[18] [18]

Arkani-Hamed, H.-C

N. Arkani-Hamed, H.-C. Cheng, M. A. Luty, S. Muko- hyama, and T. Wiseman, JHEP01, 036, arXiv:hep- ph/0507120

arXiv

[19] [19]

Van Leer, SIAM Journal on Scientific and statistical Computing5, 1 (1984)

B. Van Leer, SIAM Journal on Scientific and statistical Computing5, 1 (1984)

1984

[20] [20]

Alimi, A

J.-M. Alimi, A. F¨ uzfa, V. Boucher, Y. Rasera, J. Courtin, and P.-S. Corasaniti, MNRAS401, 775 (2010), arXiv:0903.5490

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

[21] [21]

Prunet, C

S. Prunet, C. Pichon, D. Aubert, D. Pogosyan, R. Teyssier, and S. Gottloeber, ApJS178, 179 (2008), arXiv:0804.3536 [astro-ph]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

[22] [22]

P. S. Behroozi, R. H. Wechsler, and H.-Y. Wu, The As- trophysical Journal762, 109 (2012)

2012

[23] [23]

Lewis, A

A. Lewis, A. Challinor, and A. Lasenby, ApJ538, 473 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9911177

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

[24] [24]

Smith, M

B. Smith, M. Turk, J. ZuHone, C. Robert, S. Skory, C. Hummels, A. Myers, K. Kowalik, C. Cadiou, eganhila, et al., yt-project/yt astro analysis: yt astro analysis 1.1.4 release (2025)

2025

[25] [25]

M. J. Turk, B. D. Smith, J. S. Oishi, S. Skory, S. W. Skillman, T. Abel, and M. L. Norman, The As- trophysical Journal Supplement Series192, 9 (2011), arXiv:1011.3514

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

[26] [26]

Villaescusa-Navarro, Pylians: Python libraries for the analysis of numerical simulations, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1811.008 (2018), ascl:1811.008

F. Villaescusa-Navarro, Pylians: Python libraries for the analysis of numerical simulations, Astrophysics Source Code Library, record ascl:1811.008 (2018), ascl:1811.008

2018

[27] [27]

Diemer, COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cos- mology, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos (2018), arXiv:1712.04512

B. Diemer, COLOSSUS: A Python Toolkit for Cos- mology, Large-scale Structure, and Dark Matter Halos (2018), arXiv:1712.04512

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

[28] [28]

Bean and O

R. Bean and O. Dor´ e, Phys. Rev. D69, 083503 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0307100

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

[29] [29]

D’Amico, Y

G. D’Amico, Y. Donath, L. Senatore, and P. Zhang, J. Cosmology Astropart. Phys.2024, 032 (2024), arXiv:2012.07554. 6 Supplementary Material Appendix A: Equations In the following, we exclusively deal with dark energy fluid variables, so we continue to denoteρ≡ρ de,v≡v DE. In a generic frame, the fluid equations are [9] ∂ρ ∂τ + 3H ρ+ p c2 +∇· ρ+ p c2 v= 0,...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024