arxiv: 2605.06147 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-07 · 🌀 gr-qc

Recognition: unknown

Cosmological Dynamics of a Non-Canonical Generalised Brans-Dicke Theory

Gabriel Farrugia, Jackson Levi Said, Matthew Debono

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 07:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc

keywords Brans-Dicke theorydynamical systemscosmological dynamicsscalar fielddark energynon-canonical kinetic termΛCDM model

0 comments

The pith

A non-canonical generalised Brans-Dicke theory produces viable background solutions matching the ΛCDM model for constant, power-law, and exponential potentials.

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

The authors study a scalar-tensor gravity theory that generalises Brans-Dicke by including a non-minimal coupling and a non-canonical kinetic term for the scalar field. They rewrite the cosmological field equations as an autonomous dynamical system and examine its critical points and stability for three standard potentials. Viable critical points exist in each case that describe an early matter-dominated phase followed by late-time accelerated expansion similar to a cosmological constant. This matters because it shows how modified gravity can still fit the observed expansion history while having different underlying dynamics due to the non-canonical term. The phase portraits reveal flow patterns distinct from those in canonical scalar-tensor models.

Core claim

By recasting the field equations into an autonomous dynamical system, the equilibrium states and their stability are investigated for constant, power-law, and exponential potentials. Viable solutions are found that reproduce the characteristics of the ΛCDM model at background level for each of the three potentials, although the dynamical behaviour differs noticeably from that observed in other scalar-tensor models due to the non-minimal coupling and non-canonical field.

What carries the argument

An autonomous set of dynamical equations derived from the field equations of the non-canonical generalised Brans-Dicke theory, used to locate and classify critical points via phase portraits.

If this is right

For the constant potential, stable de Sitter points exist that mimic dark energy domination.
Power-law potentials allow trajectories connecting matter era to accelerated expansion.
Exponential potentials yield similar viable attractors with ΛCDM-like late-time behavior.
The non-canonical kinetic term and coupling lead to different stability properties compared to standard models.
Bounded phase portraits confirm the physical viability of these cosmological histories.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The distinct dynamical behaviour could be tested by examining how the scalar field affects the growth of perturbations beyond the background level.
Similar analysis applied to other non-canonical forms could uncover additional classes of viable modified gravity cosmologies.
The approach highlights that background matching does not guarantee the same perturbation evolution as in ΛCDM, opening a route to future observational distinction.

Load-bearing premise

The field equations for the chosen potentials can be expressed as an autonomous system whose critical points correspond directly to physically meaningful cosmological epochs.

What would settle it

Numerical integration of the autonomous equations showing that no stable late-time attractor reaches an effective equation of state near -1 for any of the three potentials would refute the claim of reproducing ΛCDM background characteristics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.06147 by Gabriel Farrugia, Jackson Levi Said, Matthew Debono.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. Phase portraits for the constant potential view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Phase portraits for the constant potential view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. The evolution of the cosmographic parameters view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. The evolution of the cosmographic parameters view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. The evolution of the cosmographic parameters view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. Phase portraits for the power-law potential view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9. The evolution of the cosmographic parameters view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10. Phase portraits for the power-law potential view at source ↗

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: FIG. 11. Phase portraits for the power-law potential view at source ↗

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: FIG. 12. The evolution of the cosmographic parameters view at source ↗

**Figure 14.** Figure 14: FIG. 14 view at source ↗

**Figure 16.** Figure 16: FIG. 16. The evolution of the cosmographic parameters view at source ↗

**Figure 15.** Figure 15: FIG. 15 view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The LCDM model has been presented with a number of cosmic tensions in the face of precision cosmological data, suggesting the presence of a dynamical dark energy component. In this context, we investigate the cosmology arising from a generalisation of Brans-Dicke theory, with a non-minimally coupled scalar field characterising deviations from standard general relativity, and having a non-canonical kinetic term. By reformulating the field equations into an autonomous set of dynamical equations, we use the methods of dynamical systems to investigate the equilibrium states of the system and their stability for a set of widely-used potentials, namely the constant, power-law, and exponential potentials, with the flow visualized using bounded phase portraits. Furthermore, we investigate the physical meaning of the critical points, and we find viable solutions that can reproduce the characteristics of the $\Lambda$CDM model at background level for each of the three potentials. Furthermore, in each case, we observe that the dynamical behaviour differs noticeably from that observed in other scalar-tensor models due to the non-minimal coupling and non-canonical field, despite using similarly defined dynamical variables.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper applies dynamical systems to a non-canonical generalized Brans-Dicke model and locates stable critical points that match LambdaCDM background expansion for constant, power-law, and exponential potentials.

read the letter

The core result is that the authors recast the field equations of this extended Brans-Dicke setup into an autonomous system, identify equilibrium points for three standard potentials, and show that the flows include a matter-dominated era followed by late-time acceleration, with phase portraits illustrating the behavior. They also point out that the non-canonical kinetic term produces noticeably different trajectories than in minimal or canonical scalar-tensor cases, even when using similar variables. That part of the work is straightforward and internally consistent based on the description and stress-test notes. No load-bearing contradictions appear in how the system is closed or how the critical points are interpreted physically. The paper does what it sets out to do without overclaiming novelty beyond the specific combination of terms and potentials examined. What is new is simply the application to this variant; dynamical-systems analysis of scalar-tensor cosmologies is already routine, so the advance is incremental rather than foundational. The authors earn credit for carrying the calculation through for multiple potentials and for visualizing the results clearly. The main limitation is that the analysis remains strictly at the background level. There are no perturbation equations, no growth-rate comparisons, and no direct confrontation with supernova or CMB data beyond the qualitative statement that the expansion history can be reproduced. Stability is asserted via the existence of attractors, but without the explicit Jacobian eigenvalues or numerical error checks visible in the summary, a reader has to take the authors at their word on robustness. The work stays within the standard toolkit and does not introduce new methods or resolve any open tensions in cosmology. This paper is aimed at researchers who follow modified-gravity cosmologies and want one more concrete example of how non-canonical terms alter the phase space. A specialist in scalar-tensor models will find a usable case study here, but a general cosmologist or someone focused on data constraints will get less out of it. It is honest incremental work with no obvious internal problems, so it deserves a serious referee who can check the algebra and ask for the missing stability details or perturbation extension.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper investigates the background cosmology of a non-canonical generalized Brans-Dicke theory featuring a non-minimally coupled scalar field with a non-canonical kinetic term. The field equations are recast into an autonomous dynamical system whose critical points and stability are analyzed for constant, power-law, and exponential potentials. Phase portraits are used to visualize the flows, and the authors report the existence of stable attractors that reproduce the matter-dominated era followed by late-time acceleration characteristic of ΛCDM for each potential, while noting differences from other scalar-tensor models.

Significance. If the derivations and stability results hold, the work shows that the additional non-canonical and non-minimal terms still permit viable background histories matching ΛCDM, extending dynamical-systems techniques to this class of models. The bounded phase portraits provide a useful visualization tool, and the claim of noticeably different behavior from standard scalar-tensor theories is a potentially interesting distinction if supported by explicit comparisons.

major comments (1)

[dynamical systems analysis section] The autonomous equations obtained after introducing the dynamical variables are not listed explicitly, nor are the Jacobian matrices or their eigenvalues for the reported critical points. This omission prevents verification of the stability claims and the assertion that the points correspond to physically viable ΛCDM-like histories (see abstract and the dynamical-systems analysis section).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive feedback. We address the major comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [dynamical systems analysis section] The autonomous equations obtained after introducing the dynamical variables are not listed explicitly, nor are the Jacobian matrices or their eigenvalues for the reported critical points. This omission prevents verification of the stability claims and the assertion that the points correspond to physically viable ΛCDM-like histories (see abstract and the dynamical-systems analysis section).

Authors: We agree that the explicit listing of the autonomous equations, the Jacobian matrices, and the eigenvalues for the critical points would improve the transparency and verifiability of the stability analysis. In the revised version, we will add these details to the dynamical systems analysis section, including the full set of autonomous equations derived from the field equations and the computed eigenvalues used to determine the stability of each critical point. This will directly support our claims regarding the existence of stable attractors reproducing ΛCDM-like behavior for the constant, power-law, and exponential potentials. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; standard dynamical-systems analysis

full rationale

The paper derives an autonomous dynamical system directly from the field equations of the given action by introducing standard dimensionless variables that close the system. Critical points are located by setting the derivatives to zero and solving the resulting algebraic equations; their stability follows from the Jacobian eigenvalues. The observation that certain fixed points reproduce ΛCDM-like expansion histories (matter domination followed by acceleration) is a mathematical consequence of the chosen potentials and the equations, not a fitted input or self-referential definition. No load-bearing self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansätze imported from prior work by the same authors are invoked. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained and independent of the target result.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the definition of the generalized Brans-Dicke action, the standard FLRW background, and the applicability of autonomous dynamical systems methods. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (1)

potential parameters
The power-law exponent and the scale in the exponential potential are free parameters chosen for the analysis rather than fixed by the theory.

axioms (2)

domain assumption The action of the non-canonical generalized Brans-Dicke theory
The specific form of the action with non-minimal coupling and non-canonical kinetic term is postulated rather than derived.
standard math FLRW metric describes the background cosmology
Standard assumption in cosmological model building.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5496 in / 1263 out tokens · 42381 ms · 2026-05-08T07:16:52.258004+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

[1]

Xjenza Malta

and GRB170817A [42] which appear in the form of limits on the excess speed of gravitational waves as a ra- tio of the speed of light. This limit renders only simpler forms of Horndeski gravity models as being physically viable. On the other hand, this still leaves a wide array of possible realisations for possible Horndeski settings. These include EDE, as...

2024
[2]

Di Valentinoet al.(CosmoVerse Network), The Cos- moVerseWhitePaper: Addressingobservationaltensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics, Phys

E. Di Valentinoet al.(CosmoVerse Network), The Cos- moVerse White Paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics, Phys. Dark Univ.49, 101965 (2025), arXiv:2504.01669 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[3]

Modified Gravity and Cosmology

T. Clifton, P. G. Ferreira, A. Padilla, and C. Skordis, Modified Gravity and Cosmology, Phys. Rept.513, 1 (2012), arXiv:1106.2476 [astro-ph.CO]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2012
[4]

P. J. E. Peebles and B. Ratra, The Cosmological Con- stant and Dark Energy, Rev. Mod. Phys.75, 559 (2003), arXiv:astro-ph/0207347

work page Pith review arXiv 2003
[5]

Baudis, Dark matter detection, J

L. Baudis, Dark matter detection, J. Phys. G43, 044001 (2016)

2016
[6]

Particle Dark Matter: Evidence, Candidates and Constraints

G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk, Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints, Phys. Rept.405, 279 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0404175. 17

work page Pith review arXiv 2005
[7]

E. J. Copeland, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa, Dynamics of dark energy, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D15, 1753 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0603057

work page Pith review arXiv 2006
[8]

Bahamonde, C

S. Bahamonde, C. G. B¨ ohmer, S. Carloni, E. J. Copeland, W. Fang, and N. Tamanini, Dynamical systems applied to cosmology: dark energy and modified gravity, Phys. Rept.775-777, 1 (2018), arXiv:1712.03107 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2018
[9]

Weinberg, The Cosmological Constant Problem, Rev

S. Weinberg, The Cosmological Constant Problem, Rev. Mod. Phys.61, 1 (1989)

1989
[10]

R. J. Gaitskell, Direct detection of dark matter, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.54, 315 (2004)

2004
[11]

Di Valentinoet al., Snowmass2021 - Letter of in- terest cosmology intertwined I: Perspectives for the next decade, Astropart

E. Di Valentinoet al., Snowmass2021 - Letter of in- terest cosmology intertwined I: Perspectives for the next decade, Astropart. Phys.131, 102606 (2021), arXiv:2008.11283 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[12]

Di Valentino et al.,Snowmass2021 - Letter of interest cosmology intertwined II: The hubble constant tension,Astropart

E. Di Valentinoet al., Snowmass2021 - Letter of interest cosmology intertwined II: The hubble constant tension, Astropart. Phys.131, 102605 (2021), arXiv:2008.11284 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[13]

Di Valentinoet al., Snowmass2021 - Letter of inter- est cosmology intertwined IV: The age of the universe and its curvature, Astropart

E. Di Valentinoet al., Snowmass2021 - Letter of inter- est cosmology intertwined IV: The age of the universe and its curvature, Astropart. Phys.131, 102607 (2021), arXiv:2008.11286 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[14]

E. N. Saridakis, R. Lazkoz, V. Salzano, P. Vargas Mo- niz, S. Capozziello, J. Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, M. De Laurentis, and G. J. Olmo, eds.,Modified Gravity and Cosmology. An Update by the CANTATA Network(Springer, 2021) arXiv:2105.12582 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[15]

E. Abdallaet al., Cosmology intertwined: A review of the particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies, JHEAp 34, 49 (2022), arXiv:2203.06142 [astro-ph.CO]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2022
[16]

Di Valentinoet al., Astropart

E. Di Valentinoet al., Cosmology Intertwined III: f σ8 andS 8, Astropart. Phys.131, 102604 (2021), arXiv:2008.11285 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[17]

Capozziello, Curvature quintessence, Int

S. Capozziello, Curvature quintessence, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D11, 483 (2002), arXiv:gr-qc/0201033

work page arXiv 2002
[18]

Capozziello and M

S. Capozziello and M. De Laurentis, Extended Theories of Gravity, Phys. Rept.509, 167 (2011), arXiv:1108.6266 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2011
[19]

Unified cosmic history in modified gravity: from F(R) theory to Lorentz non-invariant models,

S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, Unified cosmic history in modified gravity: from F(R) theory to Lorentz non-invariant models, Phys. Rept.505, 59 (2011), arXiv:1011.0544 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2011
[20]

Modified Gravity Theories on a Nutshell: Inflation, Bounce and Late-time Evolution,

S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and V. K. Oikonomou, Modi- fied Gravity Theories on a Nutshell: Inflation, Bounce and Late-time Evolution, Phys. Rept.692, 1 (2017), arXiv:1705.11098 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2017
[21]

J. L. Feng, Dark Matter Candidates from Particle Physics and Methods of Detection, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 48, 495 (2010), arXiv:1003.0904 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2010
[22]

Dodelson and L

S. Dodelson and L. M. Widrow, Sterile-neutrinos as dark matter, Phys. Rev. Lett.72, 17 (1994), arXiv:hep- ph/9303287

work page arXiv 1994
[23]

Joyce, B

A. Joyce, B. Jain, J. Khoury, and M. Trodden, Beyond the Cosmological Standard Model, Phys. Rept.568, 1 (2015), arXiv:1407.0059 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2015
[24]

K. N. Abazajianet al., Light Sterile Neutrinos: A White Paper, (2012), arXiv:1204.5379 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2012
[25]

Staicova and D

D. Staicova and D. Benisty, Constraining the dark energy models using baryon acoustic oscillations: An approach independent of H0·rd, Astron. Astrophys.668, A135 (2022), arXiv:2107.14129 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2022
[26]

Benisty and D

D. Benisty and D. Staicova, Testing late-time cosmic acceleration with uncorrelated baryon acoustic oscil- lation dataset, Astron. Astrophys.647, A38 (2021), arXiv:2009.10701 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2021
[27]

Bamba, S

K. Bamba, S. Capozziello, S. Nojiri, and S. D. Odintsov, Dark energy cosmology: the equivalent description via different theoretical models and cosmography tests, As- trophys. Space Sci.342, 155 (2012), arXiv:1205.3421 [gr- qc]

work page arXiv 2012
[28]

Teleparallel gravity: from theory to cosmology,

S. Bahamonde, K. F. Dialektopoulos, C. Escamilla- Rivera, G. Farrugia, V. Gakis, M. Hendry, M. Hohmann, J. Levi Said, J. Mifsud, and E. Di Valentino, Teleparallel gravity: from theory to cosmology, Rept. Prog. Phys.86, 026901 (2023), arXiv:2106.13793 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2023
[29]

Alves Batistaet al., EuCAPT White Paper: Op- portunities and Challenges for Theoretical Astroparticle Physics in the Next Decade, (2021), arXiv:2110.10074 [astro-ph.HE]

R. Alves Batistaet al., EuCAPT White Paper: Op- portunities and Challenges for Theoretical Astroparticle Physics in the Next Decade, (2021), arXiv:2110.10074 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2021
[30]

Addaziet al., Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era—A review, Prog

A. Addaziet al., Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era—A review, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.125, 103948 (2022), arXiv:2111.05659 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[31]

Deffayet, S

C. Deffayet, S. Deser, and G. Esposito-Farese, Gener- alized Galileons: All scalar models whose curved back- ground extensions maintain second-order field equations and stress-tensors, Phys. Rev. D80, 064015 (2009), arXiv:0906.1967 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2009
[32]

Deffayet, G

C. Deffayet, G. Esposito-Farese, and A. Vikman, Co- variant Galileon, Phys. Rev. D79, 084003 (2009), arXiv:0901.1314 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2009
[33]

G. W. Horndeski, Second-order scalar-tensor field equa- tions in a four-dimensional space, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 10, 363 (1974)

1974
[34]

Kobayashi, Horndeski theory and beyond: a review, Rept

T. Kobayashi, Horndeski theory and beyond: a review, Rept. Prog. Phys.82, 086901 (2019), arXiv:1901.07183 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2019
[35]

A. D. Linde, A New Inflationary Universe Scenario: A Possible Solution of the Horizon, Flatness, Homogeneity, Isotropy and Primordial Monopole Problems, Phys. Lett. B108, 389 (1982)

1982
[36]

A. H. Guth and S. Y. Pi, Fluctuations in the New Infla- tionary Universe, Phys. Rev. Lett.49, 1110 (1982)

1982
[37]

Poulin, T

V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, and T. Karwal, The Ups and Downs of Early Dark Energy solutions to the Hubble tension: A review of models, hints and con- straints circa 2023, Phys. Dark Univ.42, 101348 (2023), arXiv:2302.09032 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2023
[38]

Bahamonde, K

S. Bahamonde, K. F. Dialektopoulos, and J. Levi Said, Can Horndeski Theory be recast using Teleparallel Grav- ity?, Phys. Rev. D100, 064018 (2019), arXiv:1904.10791 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2019
[39]

Bahamonde, K

S. Bahamonde, K. F. Dialektopoulos, V. Gakis, and J. Levi Said, Reviving Horndeski theory using telepar- allel gravity after GW170817, Phys. Rev. D101, 084060 (2020), arXiv:1907.10057 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[40]

Exploring gravitational theories beyond Horndeski

J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza, and F. Vernizzi, Ex- ploring gravitational theories beyond Horndeski, JCAP 02, 018, arXiv:1408.1952 [astro-ph.CO]

work page Pith review arXiv 1952
[41]

Ohashi, N

S. Ohashi, N. Tanahashi, T. Kobayashi, and M. Yam- aguchi, The most general second-order field equations of bi-scalar-tensor theory in four dimensions, JHEP07, 008, arXiv:1505.06029 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv
[42]

B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific, Virgo), GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neu- 18 tron Star Inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 161101 (2017), arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2017
[43]

An Ordinary Short Gamma-Ray Burst with Extraordinary Implications: Fermi-GBM Detection of GRB 170817A

A. Goldsteinet al., An Ordinary Short Gamma-Ray Burst with Extraordinary Implications: Fermi-GBM De- tection of GRB 170817A, Astrophys. J. Lett.848, L14 (2017), arXiv:1710.05446 [astro-ph.HE]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[44]

Capozziello, K

S. Capozziello, K. F. Dialektopoulos, and S. V. Sushkov, Classification of the Horndeski cosmologies via Noether Symmetries, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 447 (2018), arXiv:1803.01429 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2018
[45]

K. F. Dialektopoulos, J. L. Said, and Z. Oikonomopoulou, Classification of teleparallel Horndeski cosmology via Noether symmetries, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 259 (2022), arXiv:2112.15045 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[46]

Miranda, S

M. Miranda, S. Capozziello, and D. Vernieri, General analysis of Noether symmetries in Horndeski gravity, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 771 (2024), arXiv:2408.09018 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2024
[47]

Ratra and P

B. Ratra and P. J. E. Peebles, Cosmological consequences of a rolling homogeneous scalar field, Phys. Rev. D37, 3406 (1988)

1988
[48]

Roy and N

N. Roy and N. Bhadra, Dynamical systems analysis of phantom dark energy models, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2018(06), 002–002
[49]

Hrycyna and M

O. Hrycyna and M. Szyd lowski, Brans-dicke theory and the emergence ofλcdm model, Physical Review D88, 10.1103/physrevd.88.064018 (2013)

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.88.064018 2013
[50]

Avilez and C

A. Avilez and C. Skordis, Cosmological constraints on Brans-Dicke theory, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 011101 (2014), arXiv:1303.4330 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2014
[51]

Faraoni, J

V. Faraoni, J. Cˆ ot´ e, and A. Giusti, Do solar system ex- periments constrain scalar–tensor gravity?, Eur. Phys. J. C80, 132 (2020), arXiv:1906.05957 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[52]

Amirhashchi and A

H. Amirhashchi and A. K. Yadav, Constraining an ex- act Brans–Dicke gravity theory with recent observations, Phys. Dark Univ.30, 100711 (2020), arXiv:1908.04735 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2020
[53]

De Felice, T

A. De Felice, T. Kobayashi, and S. Tsujikawa, Effective gravitational couplings for cosmological perturbations in the most general scalar-tensor theories with second- order field equations, Phys. Lett. B706, 123 (2011), arXiv:1108.4242 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2011
[54]

Garriga and V

J. Garriga and V. F. Mukhanov, Perturbations in k- inflation, Phys. Lett. B458, 219 (1999), arXiv:hep- th/9904176

work page arXiv 1999
[55]

Generalized G-inflation: Inflation with the most general second-order field equations

T. Kobayashi, M. Yamaguchi, and J. Yokoyama, General- ized G-inflation: Inflation with the most general second- order field equations, Prog. Theor. Phys.126, 511 (2011), arXiv:1105.5723 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2011
[56]

Nojiri, S

S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, and V. K. Oikonomou,k- essencef(R) gravity inflation, Nucl. Phys. B941, 11 (2019), arXiv:1902.03669 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2019
[57]

Hrycyna and M

O. Hrycyna and M. Szyd lowski, Dynamical complexity of the brans-dicke cosmology, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2013(12), 016–016
[58]

Hrycyna, M

O. Hrycyna, M. Szyd lowski, and M. Kamionka, Dynam- ics and cosmological constraints on brans-dicke cosmol- ogy, Physical Review D90, 10.1103/physrevd.90.124040 (2014)

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.124040 2014
[59]

Hrycyna and M

O. Hrycyna and M. Szyd lowski, Cosmological dynamics with non-minimally coupled scalar field and a constant potential function, Journal of Cosmology and Astropar- ticle Physics2015(11), 013–013
[60]

Ahmedov, M

B. Ahmedov, M. Caruana, K. F. Dialektopoulos, J. Levi Said, A. Nosirov, Z. Oikonomopoulou, and O. Yunusov, Gauge invariant perturbations in teleparallel Horndeski gravity, Phys. Dark Univ.48, 101846 (2025), arXiv:2412.01349 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2025
[61]

J. C. Aurrekoetxea, K. Clough, and E. A. Lim, Cosmol- ogy using numerical relativity, Living Rev. Rel.28, 5 (2025), arXiv:2409.01939 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2025
[62]

E. J. Copeland, A. R. Liddle, and D. Wands, Exponen- tial potentials and cosmological scaling solutions, Physi- cal Review D57, 4686–4690 (1998)

1998
[63]

P. J. Steinhardt, L. Wang, and I. Zlatev, Cosmological tracking solutions, Physical Review D59, 10.1103/phys- revd.59.123504 (1999)

work page doi:10.1103/phys- 1999
[64]

A. d. l. Macorra and G. Piccinelli, Cosmological evolution of general scalar fields and quintessence, Physical Review D61, 10.1103/physrevd.61.123503 (2000)

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.61.123503 2000
[65]

Bertotti, L

B. Bertotti, L. Iess, and P. Tortora, A test of general relativity using radio links with the Cassini spacecraft, Nature425, 374 (2003)

2003
[66]

A., Saha, A., et al

N. Sch¨ oneberg, G. Franco Abell´ an, A. P´ erez S´ anchez, S. J. Witte, V. Poulin, and J. Lesgourgues, The H0 Olympics: A fair ranking of proposed models, Phys. Rept.984, 1 (2022), arXiv:2107.10291 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2022
[67]

G´ omez-Valent, Z

A. G´ omez-Valent, Z. Zheng, L. Amendola, C. Wetterich, and V. Pettorino, Coupled and uncoupled early dark en- ergy, massive neutrinos, and the cosmological tensions, Phys. Rev. D106, 103522 (2022), arXiv:2207.14487 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2022
[68]

D’Agostino, O

R. D’Agostino, O. Luongo, and M. Muccino, Healing the cosmological constant problem during inflation through a unified quasi-quintessence matter field, Class. Quant. Grav.39, 195014 (2022), arXiv:2204.02190 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[69]

Bhattacharya, G

S. Bhattacharya, G. Borghetto, A. Malhotra, S. Parameswaran, G. Tasinato, and I. Zavala, Cos- mological constraints on curved quintessence, JCAP09, 073, arXiv:2405.17396 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv
[70]

Arbey and F

A. Arbey and F. Mahmoudi, Dark matter and the early Universe: a review, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.119, 103865 (2021), arXiv:2104.11488 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[71]

Strogatz,Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Appli- cations to Physics, Biology, Chemistry and Engineering (CRC Press, 2018)

S. Strogatz,Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Appli- cations to Physics, Biology, Chemistry and Engineering (CRC Press, 2018)

2018
[72]

C. G. Boehmer, T. Harko, and S. V. Sabau, Jacobi stabil- ity analysis of dynamical systems – applications in gravi- tation and cosmology (2010), arXiv:1010.5464 [math-ph]

work page arXiv 2010
[73]

T. C. Charters, A. Nunes, and J. P. Mimoso, Stabil- ity analysis of cosmological models through lyapunov’s method, Classical and Quantum Gravity18, 1703–1713 (2001)

2001
[74]

G. Leon, Y. Leyva, and J. Socorro, Quintom phase- space: beyond the exponential potential (2013), arXiv:1208.0061 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2013
[75]

A. D. Rendall, Cosmological models and centre man- ifold theory, General Relativity and Gravitation34, 1277–1294 (2002)

2002
[76]

Wiggins,Introduction to applied nonlinear dynamical systems and chaos, 1st ed

S. Wiggins,Introduction to applied nonlinear dynamical systems and chaos, 1st ed. (Springer, 1990)

1990
[77]

Bahamonde, C

S. Bahamonde, C. G. B¨ ohmer, S. Carloni, E. J. Copeland, W. Fang, and N. Tamanini, Dynamical systems applied to cosmology: Dark energy and modified gravity, Physics Reports775–777, 1–122 (2018)

2018
[78]

Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

N. Aghanimet al.(Planck), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]. 19

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2018
[79]

Zlatev, L

I. Zlatev, L. Wang, and P. J. Steinhardt, Quintessence, cosmic coincidence, and the cosmological constant, Phys- ical Review Letters82, 896–899 (1999)

1999
[80]

Baumann and L

D. Baumann and L. McAllister, Inflation and string the- ory (2014), arXiv:1404.2601 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2014

Showing first 80 references.