Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

The paper claims that Quintom dark energy — models whose equation of state crosses the cosmological-constant boundary — has a UV completion in a 5D anisotropic orbifold lattice, and that the resulting effective theory naturally yields the Q

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 02:27 UTC pith:FECFUT5P

load-bearing objection The model cannot accelerate: with the paper's own field amplitude, the DE density in Eq. (3.29) is ~10^-118 of the matter term, so the DESI comparison is vacuous. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2603.24685 v3 pith:FECFUT5P submitted 2026-03-25 hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-th

UV-complete and stable Quintom Dark Energy models in the light of DESI DR2

Fotis Koutroulis This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-th
keywords Quintom dark energyphantom crossingUV completiongauge-Higgs unificationorbifold latticeDESI DR2phantom instabilityvacuum decay
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.

This paper argues that Quintom dark energy — models allowing the equation of state to cross the cosmological-constant divide — can come from a five-dimensional lattice: a single SU(2) gauge field on an anisotropic orbifold bulk, whose boundary projection gives a complex scalar and a U(1) gauge field. Below the lattice's finite cutoff, dimension-6 derivative terms turn this into a modified Quintom model with both physical and phantom degrees of freedom, including a massive gauge ghost. The paper shows the background equation of state can realize Quintom-B behaviour — starting phantom and crossing to quintessence — matching DESI DR2 data without fine-tuning. It further argues that the lattice's absence of fundamental ghosts and its low cutoff Λ ≈ 10 H0 keep the model stable against linear perturbations and vacuum decay, making this the first UV completion of Quintom dark energy.

Core claim

The central claim is that the Non-Perturbative Gauge-Higgs Unification (NPGHU) lattice — a 5D anisotropic orbifold with a bulk SU(2) gauge field — produces, on the 4D boundary, an effective action that is a modified Quintom model. At late times (below the emergent cutoff Λ) the higher-derivative operators generate a Lee-Wick-like spectrum: a physical scalar and gauge field, their phantom partners, and R-ghosts that cancel the extra poles. The background equation of state w_q then naturally crosses −1 in the Quintom-B direction, and the massive gauge ghost is the ingredient that makes the crossing match DESI data with negligible fine-tuning. The same lattice properties — ghost-free UV complet

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the NPGHU lattice and its boundary effective action: in the small-anisotropy limit γ ≪ 1 the dark-energy sector reduces to a massless Abelian Lee-Wick-like model with action Eq. (3.22), containing physical scalar φ1 and gauge A1 fields, phantom scalar φ2 and gauge A2 fields, plus R-ghosts χ and Bμ that enforce pole cancellation. The background equation of state is computed from the stress tensor as w_q = (p_DE)/(ρ_DE) in Eq. (3.38), whose free parameters are four initial conditions. The massive gauge ghost's contribution is what shifts the EoS from the standard scalar-quintom behaviour into the Quintom-B regime, allowing the crossing at z ≈ 0.5. The finite cutoff Λ ent

Load-bearing premise

The dark-energy term in the Friedmann equation is assumed to drive acceleration, but with the field amplitude fixed to |φ2,α| ≈ 10 H_m,0 the prefactor |φ2,α|²/M_Pl² is ~10⁻¹²⁰, so the dark-energy density vanishes and the universe is matter-dominated (Eq. (3.29) with Section 4.2's choice).

What would settle it

Evaluate the dark-energy fraction Ω_DE today from Eq. (3.29) with the stated initial amplitude |φ2,α| = 10 H_m,0; the prefactor |φ2,α|²/(3M_Pl²) is about 10⁻¹²⁰, so Ω_DE ≈ 0 and no acceleration occurs — a direct contradiction with the DESI fit claimed.

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

If this is right

  • If the model is right, the phantom crossing seen by DESI is an infrared emergent phenomenon from a 5D lattice, not a fundamental instability.
  • The crossing point z ≈ 0.5 is a definite prediction tied to the initial conditions at the phase transition; half the scanned parameter space lands in the best-fit DESI region.
  • The model forbids scalar potentials, so all dynamics is derivative-driven; the gauge phantom, not a potential, enables the crossing.
  • Vacuum decay to phantom pairs is cut off by Λ ≈ 10 H0 ≈ 10⁻³² eV, far below the Λ_max ≈ 1 eV bound, so the vacuum is stable over cosmic times.
  • A critical wavelength λ_cr ≈ 0.1 H_m,0⁻¹ ≈ 860 Mpc may show up as a mild scale-dependent growth or altered ISW signal.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's own Eq. (3.29) with Section 4.2's amplitude |φ2,α| ≈ 10 H_m,0 yields |φ2,α|²/M_Pl² ≈ 10⁻¹²⁰, making the dark-energy term in the Friedmann equation negligible; the universe would be matter-dominated and unable to accelerate. This consequence is unstated.
  • If the amplitude were raised to M_Pl to make DE dominant, the lattice link Λ ≈ 10 H0 would be lost, so the model's fit and its stability mechanism cannot both hold with the stated numbers.
  • The vacuum-decay regulator R_loc assumes the very conclusion it protects (that Lorentz violation bounds the phantom phase space), so the decay-rate bound is somewhat circular.
  • A testable extension: search for the predicted scale-dependent growth of structure near 860 Mpc — if absent, the Λ ≈ 10H0 scenario is ruled out.

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

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper proposes a UV completion of quintom dark energy using the 5D anisotropic orbifold lattice 'Non-Perturbative Gauge-Higgs Unification' (NPGHU). The bulk SU(2) gauge field projects on the 4D boundary onto a complex scalar and a U(1) gauge field, identified with the dark-energy sector. Below the localization cut-off Lambda, dimension-6 operators produce physical and phantom scalar and gauge degrees of freedom, together with scalar/gauge R-ghosts introduced to cancel Ostrogradsky poles. The authors derive an effective action of modified quintom type, compute the background equation of state w_q, and claim that a numerical scan of four initial conditions yields Quintom-B behavior and a good fit to DESI DR2 BAO+CMB+Pantheon data with negligible fine-tuning. They also analyze linear scalar perturbations and gravitational vacuum decay, finding stability windows for the quartic coupling lambda_chi and an upper bound on Lambda, and choose Lambda ~ 10 H_m,0. The abstract summarizes the claims as a consistent UV completion of quintom dark energy.

Significance. If correct, the construction would be the first UV completion of quintom dark energy, with phantom degrees of freedom emerging only in the IR and stabilized by a finite cutoff; the paper contains a detailed derivation of the background EoS and quantitative estimates of classical and quantum instabilities, including a Lorentz-violating regulator for the vacuum decay rate. However, the central cosmological claim fails because of an internal inconsistency: the field amplitude chosen in the paper suppresses the dark-energy density by ~10^-119 relative to matter in the Friedmann equation, so the model is matter-dominated and cannot accelerate. The EoS computed from the phantom-sector stress-energy is therefore physically irrelevant to the expansion history, and the DESI comparison is vacuous. The naturalness claim is also unsupported by the parameter selection.

major comments (3)
  1. [Eq. (3.29); §3.1–4.2] Eq. (3.29) gives H^2 = H_m,0^2 [ (|phi_2,alpha|^2/(3 M_Pl^2)) tilde H^2_DE + e^{-N} ]. In §3.1 (text above Eq. (3.9)) and §4.2 the paper fixes |phi_2,alpha|^2 ~ (10 H_m,0)^2. With H_m,0 ~ 1.5e-33 eV and M_Pl ~ 2.4e27 eV, the prefactor is ~10^-119. At late times e^{-N}=O(1), so the dark-energy term is smaller than matter by ~119 orders of magnitude. The model is therefore matter-dominated throughout its evolution; it cannot produce accelerated expansion. The w_q computed in Eqs. (3.38)-(3.39) is a ratio of two negligible dark-energy densities and has no influence on the cosmic expansion or on any DESI observable. This is an internal inconsistency, not a fine-tuning issue. Raising |phi_2,alpha| would break the normalization and stability bounds used in the paper.
  2. [§3.2, Eqs. (3.35)-(3.39), Fig. 5] The Quintom-B benchmark is constructed by fixing m^2_phi2/H^2_m,0 = m^2_A2/H^2_m,0 = 3 and by imposing the initial kinetic hierarchy stated below Eq. (3.39): |dot phi_1,n,alpha|>|dot phi_2,n,alpha| and e^{-2N_alpha}(dot A_2,n,alpha)^2/3 < |dot phi_1,n,alpha|^2 - |dot phi_2,n,alpha|^2 < e^{-2N_alpha}(dot A_2,n,alpha)^2/2. The four initial conditions are treated as free parameters and, by the authors' own account, about half of the scanned parameter space yields quintessence-like behavior. With no prior or likelihood measure, the claim of 'negligible fine-tuning' is not established; the benchmark is a hand-selected point in the space of initial conditions.
  3. [§2, Eqs. (2.8)-(2.12)] The consistency of the late-time action relies on the R-ghost pole-cancellation mechanism taken from the author's prior work (refs 32-36, 43). The paper assumes these pole-cancellation conditions hold in the FRW background and that the R-ghost masses equal the phantom masses; no derivation or lattice simulation is provided in this cosmological context. This is not by itself fatal, but it means the 'UV-complete and stable' claim is partly an import from earlier self-cited analyses rather than an independent result of this manuscript.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §1] There are several typos and notational inconsistencies, e.g. 'consistent quitnom-like spectrum' in the introduction, and the EoS is written as 'w q', 'wq', and 'w_q' in different places. A careful proofreading is needed.
  2. [Figs. 5 and 6] Fig. 5 caption says 'normalized scale factor' but the x-axis appears to be the number of e-folds N; please make axes explicit. Fig. 6 lacks axis labels and does not indicate which curves correspond to which initial-condition values.
  3. [§4.2, Eq. (4.37)] The stated bound Lambda_max ~ 1 eV appears to overestimate the actual numerical bound; with Eq. (4.36), tau_H0 > 1 implies Lambda_max ~ 0.02 eV for the stated constants. The chosen Lambda = 10 H_m,0 remains far below either value, so this discrepancy does not affect the conclusion.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged

The 'DESI-compatible Quintom-B' result is selected by initial conditions, the adopted field amplitude makes the DE sector ~10^-119 too weak to affect the Friedmann expansion, and the ghost-stability infrastructure is load-bearingly self-cited from the author's own prior work.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 3.2, Eq. (3.29); Sec. 4.2 and Eq. (3.9)]
    "In that sense, the total Hubble rate is rewritten as H^2 = H_{m,0}^2( |φ_{2,α}|^2/(3 M_Pl^2) eH^2_DE + e^{-N}) ... assuming that |φ_{2,α}|^2 ≡ H^2(N_α)≈(10H_{m,0})^2"

    With |φ_{2,α}| ≈ 10H_{m,0}, the prefactor |φ_{2,α}|^2/M_Pl^2 ≈ (1.5×10^{-32} eV)^2/(2.4×10^{27} eV)^2 ~ 10^{-118}, so the 'DE' term in Eq. (3.29) is suppressed by ~10^{-119} relative to e^{-N} ~ 1 at N=0. The Friedmann equation is therefore matter-dominated; the w_q computed in Sec. 3 is the ratio of two negligible DE densities and does not drive the expansion. Calling this an 'excellent fit to DESI data' is vacuous by construction: the Hubble expansion that DESI constrains is independent of the model's DE sector once this field amplitude is adopted.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 3.2, Eq. (3.39), Fig. 5 and following scan]
    "so in order that the EoS starts initially by a ghost phase around N_α, with w_{q,α}<−1, we should demand that |˙φ_{1,n,α}|^2 > |˙φ_{2,n,α}|^2 and e^{−2N_α}(˙A_{2,n,α})^2/3 < |˙φ_{1,n,α}|^2 − |˙φ_{2,n,α}|^2 < e^{−2N_α}(˙A_{2,n,α})^2/2. ... Of course, the above cases seem precisely selected to exploit the behavior that we have advertised"

    The Quintom-B crossing is not derived from the lattice or from the effective action; it is imposed by choosing the initial kinetic hierarchy |˙φ_1|>|˙φ_2| together with the displayed inequality. The numerical scan then returns a Quintom-B-type curve matching the DESI CPL band because the free initial conditions were selected to produce exactly that behavior. Thus the 'prediction' of Quintom-B and its DESI agreement reduce to an input choice rather than an independent output of the UV construction.

  3. self citation load bearing [Sec. 2, Eq. (2.8) and following text]
    "As it was first shown in [43] (for a similar recent analysis see also [44]) the basis of Eq. (2.3) is not complete since under the most general and gauge-invariant field reparameterization [36], one should take into account also a non-trivial shift in the measure of the associated path-integral. The former then inherits the action with one more dof for each phantom field, in the same spirit with the BRST symmetry, the so called R-ghosts."

    The central consistency mechanism of the paper—the R-ghost cure for the Ostrogradsky/phantom poles and the associated pole-cancellation conditions—is imported from the author's own prior papers [43] and [36] rather than re-derived or independently checked here. The claim that the effective quintom action is stable and UV-consistent therefore rests on a self-citation chain; if [43]'s reparameterization/measure result is not accepted, the complete action in Eq. (2.8) is not established.

full rationale

The paper's headline claims—'naturally realize Quintom-B behavior' and 'excellent fit to DESI data'—are not independent products of the NPGHU construction. First, the field amplitude adopted in Eq. (3.9)/Eq. (4.38), |φ_{2,α}|≈10H_{m,0}, makes the dark-energy term in the Friedmann equation Eq. (3.29) numerically negligible (~10^-119 relative to matter at N=0); the universe described by that equation is matter-dominated, so the computed w_q is a ratio of two irrelevant densities and cannot be what DESI measures. Second, the Quintom-B shape is explicitly selected by the initial kinetic hierarchy in Eq. (3.39) and the benchmarks in Fig. 5, with the paper itself noting that the cases 'seem precisely selected to exploit the behavior that we have advertised.' Third, the ghost-curing R-ghost structure and the phase-transition/cutoff input that make the model 'stable' are taken from the author's own prior work (refs. [35,36,43,51]), not independently verified here. These are not merely external fine-tuning concerns; they reduce the central cosmological predictions to the chosen inputs and to a self-citation chain. A lower score would be appropriate if the paper only used self-citations for background, but here the load-bearing stability and the DESI-fitting claim both depend on them.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central claims rest on five free parameters (mass ratios, four initial conditions, field amplitude, lambda_chi, and Lambda) plus several unproven domain assumptions inherited from the author's prior NPGHU work. The most damaging is the field amplitude |phi2,alpha| about 10 H_m,0, which suppresses the DE density by about 10^-100 in the Friedmann equation. The R-ghost degrees of freedom are auxiliary consistency fields with no independent falsifiable handle.

free parameters (5)
  • phantom mass ratios m^2_phi2/H^2_m,0 = m^2_A2/H^2_m,0 = 3 = 3
    Fixed to O(1) to avoid oscillations and produce the desired EoS; paper says any O(1) works but does not scan masses against data.
  • four initial conditions (|dot_phi1,n,alpha|, |dot_phi2,n,alpha|, A2,n,alpha, dot_A2,n,alpha) = benchmarks e.g. |dot_phi2,n,alpha|=1/2|dot_phi1,n,alpha|=10 dot_A2,n,alpha=0.1
    Scanned; Quintom-B requires initial kinetic hierarchy |dot_phi1|>|dot_phi2| and gauge phantom kinetic in a window; crossing point depends on them.
  • initial field amplitude |phi2,alpha| = about 10 H_m,0
    Chosen from Lambda about 10 H_m,0; makes DE energy density negligible in Eq (3.29).
  • quartic coupling lambda_chi = 0.5
    Saturated lower stability bound Eq (4.11) after substituting |phi2,alpha| about 10 H_m,0; not derived from lattice.
  • cutoff Lambda = about 10 H_m,0
    Phenomenological choice: phase transition at deep matter domination; used for vacuum decay and couplings c_alpha,c_6 about 100.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption NPGHU lattice has a 1st-order phase transition at a finite low cutoff Lambda, separating Higgs and Coulomb phases.
    From prior lattice simulations [32-36]; load-bearing for the effective action used in Section 2.
  • domain assumption Near the phase transition on the boundary, the effective action truncates at dim-6 operators and includes R-ghosts chi, B_mu.
    From [36,43]; not derived in this paper.
  • ad hoc to paper R-ghosts with masses equal to phantom masses cancel Ostrogradsky poles, leaving phantoms in the spectrum.
    Pole-cancellation conditions from [43] are assumed to hold; no explicit check in this cosmological application.
  • ad hoc to paper Lorentz invariance is approximate and can be regulated by Rloc = product_i Theta(Lambda - |q_mu|) inserted on amplitudes.
    Imposed by hand in Section 4.2; no derivation from lattice dynamics.
  • domain assumption FRW background and matter as a barotropic fluid; canonical quantization of phantoms chosen as positive-norm.
    Standard cosmology; unitarity-respecting quantization justified by matching to the Coulomb phase.
invented entities (2)
  • Scalar R-ghost chi no independent evidence
    purpose: Cures Ostrogradsky instability from dim-6 scalar operator; tachyonic mass term.
    Auxiliary dof from field reparametrization; no experimental handle.
  • Gauge R-ghost B_mu no independent evidence
    purpose: Cures gauge phantom pole; tachyonic mass term.
    Analogous to chi; no independent evidence.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 3976 in / 4259 out tokens · 179889 ms · 2026-08-03T02:27:38.389063+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We propose that Quintom dark energy, the simplest framework allowing crossing of the cosmological-constant boundary, admits a natural UV completion in a 5D anisotropic orbifold lattice: the Non-Perturbative Gauge-Higgs Unification (NPGHU) model. In this setup, a bulk 5D SU(2) gauge field projects on the 4D boundary to a complex scalar and a U(1) gauge field, identified with the dynamical dark-energy sector, while the Standard Model and dark matter remain localized in four dimensions. At late times, bulk-induced dimension-6 higher-derivative operators generate both physical and phantom scalar and gauge degrees of freedom. We show that the resulting 4D effective action is a modified Quintom model whose background equation of state can naturally realize Quintom-B behavior. A crucial contribution arises from the massive gauge ghost, allowing an excellent fit to DESI data with negligible fine-tuning, unlike standard Quintom scenarios. We further show that the inherited properties of the NPGHU construction e.g. absence of fundamental ghost instabilities, absence of potential terms and a finite low-energy cutoff $\Lambda$ associated with approximate Lorentz invariance, play a central role in the consistency of the effective theory under linear perturbations and vacuum decay. For the most natural regime, $\Lambda \approx {\cal O}(10)H_0$, the model remains robust despite the presence of IR phantom modes. Our results provide a natural and predictive framework in which Quintom dark energy can be consistently embedded in a fundamental theory.

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Effective Phantom Dark Energy: What Cosmological Reconstruction Does and Does Not Imply

    astro-ph.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    Effective phantom dark energy is a background-level reconstruction that does not imply fundamental pathologies such as ghost instabilities or null energy condition violation by the underlying stress tensor.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 37 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [4]

    C.-H. Chuang et al.,The clustering of galaxies in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: single-probe measurements and the strong power of normalized growth rate on constraining dark energy,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.433(2013) 3559, [1303.4486]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  2. [5]

    Weinberg,The Cosmological constant problems, in4th International Symposium on Sources and Detection of Dark Matter in the Universe (DM 2000), pp

    S. Weinberg,The Cosmological constant problems, in4th International Symposium on Sources and Detection of Dark Matter in the Universe (DM 2000), pp. 18–26, 2, 2000.astro-ph/0005265. DOI. [6]DESIcollaboration, A. G. Adame et al.,DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations,JCAP02(2025) 021, [2404.03002]. [7]D...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  3. [8]

    Capozziello, H

    S. Capozziello, H. Chaudhary, T. Harko and G. Mustafa,Is Dark Energy Dynamical in the DESI Era? A Critical Review,2512.10585

    arXiv

  4. [9]

    Ratra and P

    B. Ratra and P. J. E. Peebles,Cosmological Consequences of a Rolling Homogeneous Scalar Field,Phys. Rev. D 37(1988) 3406

    1988

  5. [10]

    Wetterich,Cosmology and the Fate of Dilatation Symmetry,Nucl

    C. Wetterich,Cosmology and the Fate of Dilatation Symmetry,Nucl. Phys. B302(1988) 668–696, [1711.03844]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1988

  6. [11]

    R. R. Caldwell,A Phantom menace?,Phys. Lett. B545(2002) 23–29, [astro-ph/9908168]. 38

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  7. [12]

    Armendariz-Picon, V

    C. Armendariz-Picon, V. F. Mukhanov and P. J. Steinhardt,Essentials of k essence,Phys. Rev. D63(2001) 103510, [astro-ph/0006373]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  8. [13]

    Najafi, M

    M. Najafi, M. Habibollahi, M. Reyhani, E. Di Valentino, S. Pan, J. T. Firouzjaee et al.,When Dark Energy Turns On: Constraints on a Critical Emergence Model,2603.13137

    arXiv

  9. [14]

    B. Wang, E. Abdalla, F. Atrio-Barandela and D. Pavon,Dark Matter and Dark Energy Interactions: Theoretical Challenges, Cosmological Implications and Observational Signatures,Rept. Prog. Phys.79(2016) 096901, [1603.08299]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  10. [15]

    Giar` e, M

    W. Giar` e, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes and E. Di Valentino,Interacting Dark Energy after DESI Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Measurements,Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024) 251003, [2404.15232]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  11. [16]

    Khoury, M.-X

    J. Khoury, M.-X. Lin and M. Trodden,Apparent w<-1 and a Lower S8 from Dark Axion and Dark Baryons Interactions,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 181001, [2503.16415]

    arXiv 2025

  12. [17]

    Petri, V

    V. Petri, V. Marra and R. von Marttens,Dark degeneracy in DESI DR2 data: Interacting or evolving dark energy?,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 023504, [2508.17955]

    arXiv 2026

  13. [18]

    La Penna, A

    L. La Penna, A. Notari and M. Redi,Mimicking Phantom Dark Energy with Evolving Dark Matter Mass, 2601.05235

    arXiv

  14. [19]

    Chevallier and D

    M. Chevallier and D. Polarski,Accelerating universes with scaling dark matter,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D10(2001) 213–224, [gr-qc/0009008]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  15. [20]

    E. V. Linder,Exploring the expansion history of the universe,Phys. Rev. Lett.90(2003) 091301, [astro-ph/0208512]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  16. [21]

    Feng, X.-L

    B. Feng, X.-L. Wang and X.-M. Zhang,Dark energy constraints from the cosmic age and supernova,Phys. Lett. B607(2005) 35–41, [astro-ph/0404224]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  17. [22]

    Zhao, J.-Q

    G.-B. Zhao, J.-Q. Xia, M. Li, B. Feng and X. Zhang,Perturbations of the quintom models of dark energy and the effects on observations,Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 123515, [astro-ph/0507482]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  18. [23]

    Guo, Y.-S

    Z.-K. Guo, Y.-S. Piao, X. Zhang and Y.-Z. Zhang,Two-Field Quintom Models in the w-w’ Plane,Phys. Rev. D 74(2006) 127304, [astro-ph/0608165]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  19. [24]

    Y.-f. Cai, H. Li, Y.-S. Piao and X.-m. Zhang,Cosmic Duality in Quintom Universe,Phys. Lett. B646(2007) 141–144, [gr-qc/0609039]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  20. [25]

    Y.-F. Cai, E. N. Saridakis, M. R. Setare and J.-Q. Xia,Quintom Cosmology: Theoretical implications and observations,Phys. Rept.493(2010) 1–60, [0909.2776]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  21. [26]

    Carloni, O

    Y. Carloni, O. Luongo and M. Muccino,Does dark energy really revive using DESI 2024 data?,Phys. Rev. D 111(2025) 023512, [2404.12068]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [27]

    Giar` e, M

    W. Giar` e, M. Najafi, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino and J. T. Firouzjaee,Robust preference for Dynamical Dark Energy in DESI BAO and SN measurements,JCAP10(2024) 035, [2407.16689]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  23. [28]

    Giar` e,Dynamical dark energy beyond Planck? Constraints from multiple CMB probes, DESI BAO, and type-Ia supernovae,Phys

    W. Giar` e,Dynamical dark energy beyond Planck? Constraints from multiple CMB probes, DESI BAO, and type-Ia supernovae,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 023508, [2409.17074]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  24. [29]

    Yin,Cosmic clues: DESI, dark energy, and the cosmological constant problem,JHEP05(2024) 327, [2404.06444]

    W. Yin,Cosmic clues: DESI, dark energy, and the cosmological constant problem,JHEP05(2024) 327, [2404.06444]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [30]

    Y.-H. Pang, X. Zhang and Q.-G. Huang,The impact of the Hubble tension on the evidence for dynamical dark energy,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68(2025) 280410, [2503.21600]. 39

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [31]

    R. Chen, J. M. Cline, V. Muralidharan and B. Salewicz,Quintessential dark energy crossing the phantom divide, 2508.19101

    arXiv

  27. [32]

    Knechtli, N

    F. Knechtli, N. Irges and M. Luz,New Higgs mechanism from the lattice,J. Phys. Conf. Ser.110(2008) 102006, [0711.2931]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  28. [33]

    Irges and F

    N. Irges and F. Knechtli,Lattice gauge theory approach to spontaneous symmetry breaking from an extra dimension,Nucl. Phys. B775(2007) 283–311, [hep-lat/0609045]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  29. [34]

    Alberti, N

    M. Alberti, N. Irges, F. Knechtli and G. Moir,Five-Dimensional Gauge-Higgs Unification: A Standard Model-Like Spectrum,JHEP09(2015) 159, [1506.06035]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  30. [35]

    Irges and F

    N. Irges and F. Koutroulis,RG flows in Non-Perturbative Gauge-Higgs Unification I,Nucl. Phys. B937(2018) 135–195, [1804.06306]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  31. [36]

    Irges and F

    N. Irges and F. Koutroulis,RG flows in Non-Perturbative Gauge-Higgs Unification II. Effective action for the Higgs phase near the quantum phase transition,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 187, [2008.03981]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  32. [37]

    Tsujikawa,Realizing the phantom-divide crossing with vector and scalar fields,2601.21274

    S. Tsujikawa,Realizing the phantom-divide crossing with vector and scalar fields,2601.21274

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  33. [38]

    Holdom,Accelerated expansion and the Goldstone ghost,JHEP07(2004) 063, [hep-th/0404109]

    B. Holdom,Accelerated expansion and the Goldstone ghost,JHEP07(2004) 063, [hep-th/0404109]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  34. [39]

    V. A. Rubakov,Phantom without uv pathology, 2006

    2006

  35. [40]

    Libanov, V

    M. Libanov, V. Rubakov, E. Papantonopoulos, M. Sami and S. Tsujikawa,UV stable, Lorentz-violating dark energy with transient phantom era,JCAP08(2007) 010, [0704.1848]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  36. [41]

    G. R. Dvali, G. Gabadadze and M. Porrati,4-D gravity on a brane in 5-D Minkowski space,Phys. Lett. B485 (2000) 208–214, [hep-th/0005016]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  37. [42]

    Irges, F

    N. Irges, F. Knechtli and K. Yoneyama,Higgs mechanism near the 5d bulk phase transition,Phys. Lett. B722 (2013) 378–383, [1212.5514]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  38. [43]

    Irges and F

    N. Irges and F. Koutroulis,On RG flows in generalized effective field theory,Nucl. Phys. B950(2020) 114833, [1907.07726]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  39. [44]

    J. A. R. Cembranos, E. G. Hemon and J. J. Sanz-Cillero,A Consistent Path Integral Approach to Higher Derivative Oscillators,2511.03013

    arXiv

  40. [45]

    R. S. Chivukula, A. Farzinnia, R. Foadi and E. H. Simmons,Global Symmetries and Renormalizability of Lee-Wick Theories,Phys. Rev. D82(2010) 035015, [1006.2800]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  41. [46]

    Y. Yang, X. Ren, Q. Wang, Z. Lu, D. Zhang, Y.-F. Cai et al.,Quintom cosmology and modified gravity after DESI 2024,Sci. Bull.69(2024) 2698–2704, [2404.19437]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  42. [47]

    Durrer, R

    R. Durrer, R. von Eckardstein, D. Garg, K. Schmitz, O. Sobol and S. Vilchinskii,Scalar perturbations from inflation in the presence of gauge fields,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 043533, [2404.19694]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  43. [48]

    Y. Cai, X. Ren, T. Qiu, M. Li and X. Zhang,The Quintom theory of dark energy after DESI DR2,2505.24732

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  44. [49]

    J. M. Cline, S. Jeon and G. D. Moore,The Phantom menaced: Constraints on low-energy effective ghosts,Phys. Rev. D70(2004) 043543, [hep-ph/0311312]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  45. [50]

    J. M. Cline, M. Puel, T. Toma and Q. S. Wang,Phantom fluid cosmology: Impact of a phantom hidden sector on cosmological observables,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 095033, [2308.12989]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  46. [51]

    Irges and F

    N. Irges and F. Koutroulis,Symmetry breaking and renormalization group flows with higher dimensional operators,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 065004, [1905.05506]. 40

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019