Disformal Maps: Classification and Singular Dynamics

Alexander Vikman; Masahide Yamaguchi; Mohammad Ali Gorji; Pavel Jirou\v{s}ek

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 95 references

Disformal Maps: Classification and Singular Dynamics

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Disformal maps are classified by Cayley–Hamilton degree and Hawking–Ellis type, and the mimetic stress tensor's type is set by a single polynomial map.

desk verdict Solid classification of disformal maps with one real caveat: the 'general' mimetic tensor result is proven only for polynomial kernel modes, so the abstract oversells slightly. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.04094 v1 pith:M7S3457T submitted 2026-08-04 gr-qc hep-th

Mohammad Ali Gorji , Pavel Jiroušek , Alexander Vikman , Masahide Yamaguchi This is my paper · ORCID

classification gr-qchep-th MSC 83C0583D05 PACS 04.20.-q04.50.Kd

keywords disformaltransformationCayley–HamiltondegreeHawking–EllisclassificationSegre–Plebanskimimeticgravityenergy-momentumtensorJordannormalformsingularmaps

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper asks how metric transformations of the form $g_{\mu\nu}=Ch_{\mu\nu}+Dt_{\mu\nu}$ behave before any particular matter content is chosen. It shows that every such transformation carries a Cayley–Hamilton degree—the degree of the minimal polynomial of the mixed tensor $t^\mu{}_\nu$—and that this single number, together with the Jordan-block structure of $t$, organizes the whole map. For non-singular maps this yields explicit inverse metrics and simple criteria for Lorentzian signature. For singular maps, where new degrees of freedom appear, the induced mimetic energy-momentum tensor is always a real polynomial $p_n(t)$ in $t$, so its Hawking–Ellis type is read off from derivatives of $p_n$ at the eigenvalues of $t$. If correct, this gives a field-content-agnostic way to predict the physical stress-energy type of the new sector from the algebraic type of the disformal tensor alone.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the polynomial map $T^{\star\mu}{}_\nu=p_n(t)^\mu{}_\nu$, where $p_n(x)=\tilde a+\sum_{I=1}^{n-1}\tilde b_I x^I$ and $n$ is the Cayley–Hamilton degree of $t^\mu{}_\nu$, the degree of the minimal polynomial of the mixed tensor. Since polynomials respect similarity transformations and act blockwise on Jordan normal form, the whole type correspondence reduces to the exact Taylor expansion $p_n(J_s(\lambda))=\sum_{k=0}^{s-1} p_n^{(k)}(\lambda)N_s^k/k!$ on a Jordan block of size $s$, with $N_s$ the nilpotent shift. For the complex pair of Type IV, the divided difference $\Delta_n$ plays the role of the derivative and decides whether the mapped pair stays complex or collapses to a repeated real eigenvalue. Table 2 supplies the dictionary from the coefficients $\tilde a,\tilde b_I$ to $p_n(\lambda)$, $p'_n(\lambda)$, $\frac12 p''_n(\lambda)$, and $\Delta_n$.

What would settle it

Take a specific Lorentzian $h_{\mu\nu}$ and a symmetric $t_{\mu\nu}$ with a given Hawking–Ellis type, solve the full zero-mode equation (4.13) without imposing the polynomial ansatz, and check whether any solution exists outside the span of $h$ and powers of $t$; one such solution would violate the claimed generality. Alternatively, for a CH4 Type IV tensor with $\Delta_n=0$, construct $T^\star$ explicitly and verify whether it really is Type I with no nilpotent part, as Table 3 predicts.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is a complete correspondence between three algebraic objects: the Cayley–Hamilton degree of $t^\mu{}_\nu$, its Hawking–Ellis type with Segre subclass, and the Hawking–Ellis type of the mimetic energy-momentum tensor $T^{\star\mu}{}_\nu=p_n(t)^\mu{}_\nu$ that appears when the transformation is singular. Table 3 states the rule: Type I always maps to Type I; Type II maps to Type II unless $p'_n(\lambda_1)=0$, in which case it becomes Type I; Type III maps to Type III unless $p'_n(\lambda_1)=0$, then to Type II (or Type I if also $p''_n(\lambda_1)=0$); Type IV maps to Type IV unless the divided difference $\Delta_n=(p_n(z)-p_n(\bar z))/(z-\bar z)$ vanishes, in which case it collapses to Type I. Because a real polynomial cannot create nilpotent Jordan blocks or turn real eigenvalues complex, the type can only move downward. The paper also establishes Table 1, which restricts which Hawking–Ellis types are possible for each Cayley–Hamilton degree, so that often the type is fixed without performing a Jordan decomposition.

Load-bearing premise

Everything in the singular-map part rests on assuming that the zero-mode eigentensor of the Jacobian lies in the polynomial subspace spanned by $h_{\mu\nu}$ and powers of $t_{\mu\nu}$; if the kernel contains non-polynomial modes, the claimed general form of $T^\star$ and Table 3 would be incomplete.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any non-singular disformal map, the inverse contravariant metric can be written down explicitly from the Cayley–Hamilton coefficients, with no case-by-case input from the field content.
Knowing only the Cayley–Hamilton degree of $t$ restricts the possible Hawking–Ellis types, and for several degrees the type is fixed without performing a Jordan decomposition.
For singular maps, the new degree of freedom always has a stress tensor of the polynomial form $p_n(t)$, so its Hawking–Ellis type—and hence many physical properties—can be inferred directly from $t$ via Table 3.
The determinant test $\det g/\det h>0$ is necessary and sufficient in four dimensions for the disformed metric to be Lorentzian up to overall sign, while the stronger requirement of a common causal structure is equivalent to $C+D\lambda_i>0$ for every real eigenvalue of $t$, with no extra condition from the Type IV complex pair.
In the two worked examples, the general framework reproduces the known dust-like mimetic dark-matter tensor for $t_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\mu\phi\partial_\nu\phi$ and the richer gauge-field mimetic tensors for $t_{\mu\nu}=F^\alpha{}_\mu F_{\alpha\nu}$, including the cosmological-constant branch.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Going beyond the paper, the same polynomial-block argument applies to any stress tensor that is a real polynomial in a second symmetric tensor, so the type-reduction rules in Table 3 may hold more broadly than mimetic gravity, for instance in bimetric or vector-tensor constructions.
The Type IV-to-I collapse when $\Delta_n=0$ is a generic mechanism for turning a complex eigenvalue pair into a repeated real one; constructing explicit CH4 models that realize $\Delta_n=0$ could yield mimetic sectors with perfect-fluid-like stress rather than exotic ones.
The paper leaves open whether non-polynomial zero modes of the Jacobian exist; if they do, they would produce mimetic tensors outside the closure of $h$ and powers of $t$, and Table 3 would only describe the polynomial sector.
Because the determinant condition $\det g/\det h>0$ is four-dimensional, extending the classification to higher dimensions would require replacing the single sign test by a per-eigenvalue analysis; the paper's own appendix on causal compatibility suggests how the strong inequalities would generalize.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper is worth a serious referee. What is genuinely new: Table 1 linking Cayley-Hamilton degree to Hawking-Ellis type, and the polynomial-map theorem (Table 3) that the mimetic energy-momentum tensor T* inherits or degrades the type of the disformal tensor t in a controlled way. That is a real organizing tool for the modified-gravity subfield, which has mostly worked case by case. The inverse metric formula via Cayley-Hamilton is also a useful systematic result, and the determinant signature criterion plus the appendix on causally compatible frames are careful and correct.

The derivations are self-contained and reproducible: no fitted parameters, no post-hoc selection, and the scalar and gauge examples check out against known mimetic results. The self-citations are used as examples, not as inputs to the central theorem, so no circularity problem.

The soft spot is exactly what the reader and the stress-test note identify. The abstract claims a 'general form' for the mimetic energy-momentum tensor, but the proof assumes the zero-mode eigentensor lies in the polynomial subspace spanned by h and powers of t, Eqs. (4.14)-(4.16). No completeness proof or dimension count is given for the kernel of the Jacobian, and the closure conditions (4.31) are asserted rather than derived. The paper's own summary is honest about this ('polynomial modes of the Jacobian kernel'), so the fix is straightforward: qualify the abstract and either prove completeness or state the result as conditional on the polynomial ansatz. The scalar and gauge examples are special cases where the contractions close, so they do not demonstrate completeness for generic field content. That makes the central claim narrower than advertised, but not wrong.

Minor point: the CH3 and CH4 coefficient dictionaries are not worked out in full, which limits some practical applications, but this is a matter of tedious algebra, not a conceptual gap.

Verdict: conditional acceptance. The polynomial map theorem is sound, the classification is useful, and the paper deserves referee time. I would cite it for Table 1 and Table 3. If the authors qualify the scope and, ideally, address the kernel-completeness question, this becomes a solid reference.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a general framework for four-dimensional disformal metric transformations g_{\mu\nu}=C h_{\mu\nu}+D t_{\mu\nu} (and their polynomial generalizations), using the Cayley-Hamilton theorem to derive explicit inverse-metric formulas, to connect the Hawking-Ellis/Segre classification of t_{\mu\nu} with its Cayley-Hamilton degree, and to study singular (mimetic) transformations. The main new results are: an explicit inverse metric (A.7), a table linking Hawking-Ellis types to Cayley-Hamilton degrees (Table 1), a determinant criterion for Lorentzian signature preservation (3.25), and a polynomial map p_n(t) for the mimetic energy-momentum tensor T^\star=p_n(t), with a table transferring Hawking-Ellis types from t to T^\star (Table 3). The framework is illustrated on scalar-field and gauge-field examples, reproducing known mimetic dust and cosmological-constant-like tensors.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper provides a useful and largely self-contained toolkit for the modified-gravity community: the inverse-metric formulas remove a practical obstacle for generic disformal maps; Table 1 gives a quick classification shortcut from Cayley-Hamilton degree to Hawking-Ellis type; and the polynomial-type transfer in Table 3 is an elegant way to infer properties of mimetic energy-momentum tensors without redoing Jordan decompositions. The derivations are explicit, the examples are concrete, and the paper is careful to distinguish pointwise determinant criteria from stronger causal-compatibility conditions. A particular strength is that the paper's own Summary honestly narrows the mimetic result to 'polynomial modes of the Jacobian kernel'; the main gap is that the Abstract and the central Eq. (4.20) present this same result as the 'general form' without a completeness proof.

major comments (2)

[Sec. 4, Eqs. (4.14)-(4.16) and (4.20)] The claim that the mimetic energy-momentum tensor has the general form T^\star=p_n(t) is not established. Equation (4.13) is a linear equation for the ten independent components of the dual zero-mode \zeta^\star_{\mu\nu}, but the paper restricts the solution to the polynomial subspace spanned by h_{\mu\nu} and powers of t_{\mu\nu}, stating only that 'we can consistently seek a solution' in this form. No completeness proof or dimension count shows that the kernel of the Jacobian J^{\mu\nu}_{\alpha\beta} lies in that subspace. The Summary itself narrows this to 'polynomial modes of the Jacobian kernel', while the Abstract and Eq. (4.20) claim the 'general form'. If the kernel contains non-polynomial modes, T^\star need not be a polynomial in t, and the type-transfer argument in Sec. 4.1 and Table 3 need not apply. The authors should either prove completeness (for instance, by solving (4.26) for a generic \zeta^\star in the CH2 case and showing the kernel is one-dimensional and contained in span{h,t}, and by deriving the analogous closure conditions for CH3/CH4), or explicitly restate the theorem as conditional on the polynomial ansatz.
[Sec. 4, Eq. (4.31)] The closure conditions h^{\alpha\beta}\partial t_{\alpha\beta}/\partial h^{\rho\sigma}=c_2 t_{\rho\sigma} and t^{\alpha\beta}\partial t_{\alpha\beta}/\partial h^{\rho\sigma}=c_0 h_{\rho\sigma}+c_1 t_{\rho\sigma} are asserted 'whenever these contractions close', but no general characterization is given of the disformal tensors t_{\mu\nu} for which such closure holds. These conditions are load-bearing for the CH2 zero-mode equation (4.26) and hence for the explicit solutions (5.31) and the mimetic tensors (5.34), (5.40), and (5.42). The scalar and gauge examples are special cases in which the closure happens to hold; for a generic tensor built from vector or other fields there is no reason to expect the contractions to remain in the {h,t} basis. The authors should either prove closure for a stated class of field contents or add an explicit condition on t_{\mu\nu} under which the polynomial-sector solution is complete.

minor comments (4)

[Sec. 5.1, Eqs. (5.14)-(5.15)] The null branch Y=0 is explicitly excluded from the integration leading to (5.14) and from the resulting mimetic tensor (5.15); since the abstract presents the scalar-field case as an application, please state the corresponding T^\star on the null branch or explain why it is outside the polynomial sector.
[Sec. 5.2.2, after Eq. (5.41)] The sentence 'The conservation law (4.11) implies that the overall coefficient is constant' is not immediate from (5.38) with b=0; a short derivation, or at least an explicit statement of the assumptions (e.g., F_{\mu\nu} satisfying the Bianchi identity and the mimetic constraint), would make the step transparent.
[Sec. 3.4, before Eq. (3.25)] The phrase 'necessary and sufficient for g_{\mu\nu} to possess causal cones, i.e., for the hyperbolicity of the equations of motion of any field minimally coupled to g_{\mu\nu} alone' is slightly too strong, since hyperbolicity also depends on the field's kinetic operator; I suggest rephrasing to 'necessary and sufficient for g_{\mu\nu} to be Lorentzian up to an overall sign.'
[Sec. 5.1, Eq. (5.16)] The identity X=Y/(C+DY)=-\epsilon relies on the branch Y\neq 0 and on (5.14); stating these two assumptions explicitly at Eq. (5.16) would help readers avoid applying it to the null case.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the classification and mimetic-tensor results follow from explicit algebraic derivations and clearly stated ansatze, not from the quantities they purport to derive.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The inverse-metric formula (A.7) is obtained by imposing g^{mu alpha} g_{alpha nu} = delta^mu_nu and reducing powers via the Cayley-Hamilton theorem; no fitted parameter or predicted quantity is used as an input. Table 1 links Cayley-Hamilton degree to Jordan structure through the minimal polynomial, a standard algebraic fact derived in Sec. 2.1; Table 3 follows from exact Jordan-block evaluation of polynomials in Eqs. (4.21)-(4.23), which is a mathematical consequence of the polynomial form T^star = p_n(t). The mimetic tensor analysis explicitly states that it seeks solutions within the polynomial invariant subspace (4.14)-(4.16), and the Summary honestly narrows the result to 'polynomial modes of the Jacobian kernel'; the abstract's 'general form' is thus a completeness caveat, not a circularity, since the polynomial ansatz is not derived from the Hawking-Ellis conclusions it produces. Self-citations, including Refs. [64,65,81,88,96], are used only as context or as examples whose known results the framework reproduces; none supplies a load-bearing theorem for the central derivation. No step reduces by definition to its own output, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest mainly on standard linear algebra (Cayley-Hamilton, Jordan normal forms, the Lorentzian classification of symmetric tensors). The paper introduces two non-standard assumptions for the mimetic sector: the polynomial zero-mode ansatz and the closure of the CH2 contraction identities; neither is proven to be exhaustive. The seed action is taken to be Einstein-Hilbert with matter.

assumptions (6)

standard math The Cayley-Hamilton theorem holds for 4x4 matrices.
Used throughout to reduce high powers of t and to derive the inverse metric (Eq. (2.3) and Sec. 2).
standard math Symmetric rank-2 tensors on a 4-dimensional Lorentzian manifold admit the Hawking-Ellis types I-IV with the corresponding Jordan normal forms (3.1)-(3.2).
Crucial for the classification tables; the paper reviews and proves this in appendices B and C.
ad hoc to paper The zero-mode eigentensor of the Jacobian J^{mu nu}_{alpha beta} lies in the polynomial subspace spanned by h and powers of t (4.14)-(4.16).
Basis for the claimed general form of T^star; no completeness proof is provided.
ad hoc to paper For CH2, the contractions h^{alpha beta} partial t_{alpha beta}/partial h^{rho sigma} and t^{alpha beta} partial t_{alpha beta}/partial h^{rho sigma} close on the {h, t} basis (4.31).
Needed for the explicit CH2 eigenvalue system (4.26)-(4.30); stated for cases where closure holds.
domain assumption The seed action is Einstein-Hilbert minimally coupled to matter (4.8).
The derivation of T^star and the Einstein equations (4.9) is specific to this seed action.
domain assumption In Sec. 3.3, the tensor t_{mu nu} is independent of h_{mu nu} (3.10).
Used to prove closure under composition of disformal maps; relaxing it would change the composition result.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Disformal Maps: Classification and Singular Dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/M7S3457T

@misc{pith2026260804094,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Disformal Maps: Classification and Singular Dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/M7S3457T}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.04094}
}

abstract

Being agnostic about the field content of a gravitational system, we consider a general disformal transformation of the metric, $g_{\mu\nu}=Ch_{\mu\nu}+Dt_{\mu\nu}$, on a four-dimensional Lorentzian manifold. Using the Cayley-Hamilton theorem, we derive an explicit formula for the inverse disformed metric. Implementing the Hawking-Ellis classification, we categorize disformal transformations into four types: Type I, II, III, and IV, based on possible Jordan block structures. By examining the eigenvalues, we further classify each type into its corresponding Segre subclasses. We find explicit links between the Cayley-Hamilton degree of the disformal tensor $t_{\mu\nu}$, its Hawking-Ellis type, and its Segre subclass, which can restrict the possible Hawking-Ellis types once only the Cayley-Hamilton degree is known. In some cases, the type can be determined without even performing a full Jordan decomposition. For singular transformations, when new dynamical degrees of freedom emerge, we obtain the general form of their corresponding mimetic energy-momentum tensor $T^\star_{\mu\nu}$. We show that the Hawking-Ellis types of $t_{\mu\nu}$ and $T^\star_{\mu\nu}$ always coincide for Type I. For Types II and III it can differ, while Type IV is preserved generically but can reduce to Type I when the complex pair is mapped to a repeated real eigenvalue. This makes it possible to infer physical properties of $T^\star_{\mu\nu}$ directly from the Hawking-Ellis type of $t_{\mu\nu}$. We apply our setup to two specific cases: $t_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\mu\phi\partial_\nu\phi$ and $t_{\mu\nu}=F^{\alpha}{}_{\mu}F_{\alpha\nu}$, where $\phi$ is a scalar field and $F_{\mu\nu}$ is the field-strength tensor of a gauge field. This general framework can be used to systematically study the kinematical and dynamical properties of various invertible and non-invertible disformal transformations with different field content.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.04094 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Sections of the light cones of hµν (blue) and gµν (orange) in the (u, n1) plane for a Type II disformal transformation; shaded wedges indicate the timelike directions of each metric and s = v 1/v0 denotes the slope of v a = v 0u a +v 1n a 1 . The panels are drawn for (C + Dλ1, Df) = (1, 1 2 ) and (−1, − 1 2 ) respectively, for which the second g-null direction lies at s = 3 in both cases. In accordance with (D.4), t… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Section of the light cones of hµν (blue) and gµν (orange) in the (u, n1) plane for a Type IV disformal transformation; shaded wedges indicate the timelike directions of each metric. The figure is drawn for (a, b) = (1, 3 4 ), for which the g-null directions ℓ a ± = u a + s±n a 1 have slopes s− = − 1 2 and s+ = 2, in accordance with s+s− = −1. Exactly one g-null direction lies inside the h-cone and the other outside,… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

95 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

[4]

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

1974
[5]

Chiba, T

T. Chiba, T. Okabe and M. Yamaguchi,Kinetically driven quintessence, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 023511 [arXiv:astro-ph/9912463]

arXiv 2000
[6]

Armendariz-Picon, T

C. Armendariz-Picon, T. Damour and V. F. Mukhanov,k - inflation, Phys. Lett. B458 (1999) 209 [arXiv:hep-th/9904075]

arXiv 1999
[7]

Garriga and V

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

arXiv 1999
[8]

Armendariz-Picon, V

C. Armendariz-Picon, V. F. Mukhanov and P. J. Steinhardt,A Dynamical solution to the problem of a small cosmological constant and late time cosmic acceleration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85(2000) 4438 [arXiv:astro-ph/0004134]

arXiv 2000
[9]

Armendariz-Picon, V

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

arXiv 2001
[10]

Nicolis, R

A. Nicolis, R. Rattazzi and E. Trincherini,The Galileon as a local modification of gravity, Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 064036 [arXiv:0811.2197]

arXiv 2009
[11]

Deffayet, S

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

arXiv 2009

Show all 95 references

[12]

Deffayet, G

C. Deffayet, G. Esposito-Farese and A. Vikman,Covariant Galileon, Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 084003 [arXiv:0901.1314]. 46

2009 arXiv
[13]

Deffayet, O

C. Deffayet, O. Pujolas, I. Sawicki and A. Vikman,Imperfect Dark Energy from Kinetic Gravity Braiding, JCAP10(2010) 026 [arXiv:1008.0048]

2010 arXiv
[14]

Kobayashi, M

T. Kobayashi, M. Yamaguchi and J. Yokoyama,G-inflation: Inflation driven by the Galileon field, Phys. Rev. Lett.105(2010) 231302 [arXiv:1008.0603]

2010 arXiv
[15]

Kobayashi, M

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

2011 arXiv
[16]

Deffayet, X

C. Deffayet, X. Gao, D. A. Steer and G. Zahariade,From k-essence to generalised Galileons, Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 064039 [arXiv:1103.3260]

2011 arXiv
[17]

Langlois,Dark energy and modified gravity in degenerate higher-order scalar–tensor (DHOST) theories: A review, Int

D. Langlois,Dark energy and modified gravity in degenerate higher-order scalar–tensor (DHOST) theories: A review, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D28(2019) 1942006 [arXiv:1811.06271]

2019 arXiv
[18]

Kobayashi,Horndeski theory and beyond: a review, Rept

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

2019 arXiv
[19]

Zumalac´ arregui and J

M. Zumalac´ arregui and J. Garc ´ ıa-Bellido,Transforming gravity: from derivative couplings to matter to second-order scalar-tensor theories beyond the Horndeski Lagrangian, Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 064046 [arXiv:1308.4685]

2014 arXiv
[20]

Gleyzes, D

J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza and F. Vernizzi,Healthy theories beyond Horndeski, Phys. Rev. Lett.114(2015) 211101 [arXiv:1404.6495]

2015 arXiv
[21]

Gleyzes, D

J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza and F. Vernizzi,Exploring gravitational theories beyond Horndeski, JCAP02(2015) 018 [arXiv:1408.1952]

2015 arXiv
[22]

Crisostomi, K

M. Crisostomi, K. Koyama and G. Tasinato,Extended Scalar-Tensor Theories of Gravity, JCAP04(2016) 044 [arXiv:1602.03119]

2016 arXiv
[23]

Ben Achour, D

J. Ben Achour, D. Langlois and K. Noui,Degenerate higher order scalar-tensor theories beyond Horndeski and disformal transformations, Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 124005 [arXiv:1602.08398]

2016 arXiv
[24]

Ben Achour, M

J. Ben Achour, M. Crisostomi, K. Koyama, D. Langlois, K. Noui and G. Tasinato, Degenerate higher order scalar-tensor theories beyond Horndeski up to cubic order, JHEP12 (2016) 100 [arXiv:1608.08135]

2016 arXiv
[25]

Langlois and K

D. Langlois and K. Noui,Degenerate higher derivative theories beyond Horndeski: evading the Ostrogradski instability, JCAP02(2016) 034 [arXiv:1510.06930]

2016 arXiv
[26]

Tasinato,Cosmic Acceleration from Abelian Symmetry Breaking, JHEP04(2014) 067 [arXiv:1402.6450]

G. Tasinato,Cosmic Acceleration from Abelian Symmetry Breaking, JHEP04(2014) 067 [arXiv:1402.6450]

2014 arXiv
[27]

Heisenberg,Generalization of the Proca Action, JCAP05(2014) 015 [arXiv:1402.7026]

L. Heisenberg,Generalization of the Proca Action, JCAP05(2014) 015 [arXiv:1402.7026]

2014 arXiv
[28]

Heisenberg, R

L. Heisenberg, R. Kase and S. Tsujikawa,Beyond generalized Proca theories, Phys. Lett. B 760(2016) 617 [arXiv:1605.05565]. 47

2016 arXiv
[29]

Kimura, A

R. Kimura, A. Naruko and D. Yoshida,Extended vector-tensor theories, JCAP01(2017) 002 [arXiv:1608.07066]

2017 arXiv
[30]

Heisenberg,A systematic approach to generalisations of General Relativity and their cosmological implications, Phys

L. Heisenberg,A systematic approach to generalisations of General Relativity and their cosmological implications, Phys. Rept.796(2019) 1 [arXiv:1807.01725]

2019 arXiv
[31]

de Rham, G

C. de Rham, G. Gabadadze and A. J. Tolley,Resummation of Massive Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.106(2011) 231101 [arXiv:1011.1232]

2011 arXiv
[32]

Hinterbichler,Theoretical Aspects of Massive Gravity, Rev

K. Hinterbichler,Theoretical Aspects of Massive Gravity, Rev. Mod. Phys.84(2012) 671 [arXiv:1105.3735]

2012 arXiv
[33]

de Rham,Massive Gravity, Living Rev

C. de Rham,Massive Gravity, Living Rev. Rel.17(2014) 7 [arXiv:1401.4173]

2014 arXiv
[34]

Horava,Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point, Phys

P. Horava,Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point, Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 084008 [arXiv:0901.3775]

2009 arXiv
[35]

Horava,Spectral Dimension of the Universe in Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point, Phys

P. Horava,Spectral Dimension of the Universe in Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point, Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009) 161301 [arXiv:0902.3657]

2009 arXiv
[36]

D. Blas, O. Pujolas and S. Sibiryakov,Consistent Extension of Horava Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.104(2010) 181302 [arXiv:0909.3525]

2010 arXiv
[37]

D. Blas, O. Pujolas and S. Sibiryakov,Models of non-relativistic quantum gravity: The Good, the bad and the healthy, JHEP04(2011) 018 [arXiv:1007.3503]

2011 arXiv
[38]

Mukohyama,Horava-Lifshitz Cosmology: A Review, Class

S. Mukohyama,Horava-Lifshitz Cosmology: A Review, Class. Quant. Grav.27(2010) 223101 [arXiv:1007.5199]

2010 arXiv
[39]

R. T. Hammond,Torsion gravity, Rept. Prog. Phys.65(2002) 599

2002
[40]

J. W. Maluf,The teleparallel equivalent of general relativity, Annalen Phys.525(2013) 339 [arXiv:1303.3897]

2013 arXiv
[41]

Bahamonde, C

S. Bahamonde, C. G. B¨ ohmer and M. Wright,Modified teleparallel theories of gravity, Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 104042 [arXiv:1508.05120]

2015 arXiv
[42]

Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, L

J. Beltr´ an Jim´ enez, L. Heisenberg and T. Koivisto,Coincident General Relativity, Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 044048 [arXiv:1710.03116]

2018 arXiv
[43]

Krssak, R

M. Krssak, R. J. van den Hoogen, J. G. Pereira, C. G. B¨ ohmer and A. A. Coley,Teleparallel theories of gravity: illuminating a fully invariant approach, Class. Quant. Grav.36(2019) 183001 [arXiv:1810.12932]

2019 arXiv
[44]

Bahamonde, K

S. Bahamonde, K. F. Dialektopoulos, C. Escamilla-Rivera, G. Farrugia, V. Gakis, M. Hendry et al.,Teleparallel gravity: from theory to cosmology, Rept. Prog. Phys.86 (2023) 026901 [arXiv:2106.13793]

2023 arXiv
[45]

J. M. Overduin and P. S. Wesson,Kaluza-Klein gravity, Phys. Rept.283(1997) 303 [arXiv:gr-qc/9805018]

1997 arXiv
[46]

Randall and R

L. Randall and R. Sundrum,A Large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension, Phys. Rev. Lett.83(1999) 3370 [arXiv:hep-ph/9905221]. 48

1999 arXiv
[47]

Randall and R

L. Randall and R. Sundrum,An Alternative to compactification, Phys. Rev. Lett.83(1999) 4690 [arXiv:hep-th/9906064]

1999 arXiv
[48]

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

2000 arXiv
[49]

Maartens and K

R. Maartens and K. Koyama,Brane-World Gravity, Living Rev. Rel.13(2010) 5 [arXiv:1004.3962]

2010 arXiv
[50]

Clifton, P

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

2012 arXiv
[51]

Joyce, B

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

2015 arXiv
[52]

Afshordi, D

N. Afshordi, D. J. H. Chung and G. Geshnizjani,Cuscuton: A Causal Field Theory with an Infinite Speed of Sound, Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 083513 [arXiv:hep-th/0609150]

2007 arXiv
[53]

Lin and S

C. Lin and S. Mukohyama,A Class of Minimally Modified Gravity Theories, JCAP10 (2017) 033 [arXiv:1708.03757]

2017 arXiv
[54]

Mukohyama and K

S. Mukohyama and K. Noui,Minimally Modified Gravity: a Hamiltonian Construction, JCAP07(2019) 049 [arXiv:1905.02000]

2019 arXiv
[55]

K. Aoki, M. A. Gorji and S. Mukohyama,A consistent theory ofD→4 Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity, Phys. Lett. B810(2020) 135843 [arXiv:2005.03859]

2020 arXiv
[56]

Takahashi, H

K. Takahashi, H. Motohashi and M. Minamitsuji,Invertible disformal transformations with higher derivatives, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 024015 [arXiv:2111.11634]

2022 arXiv
[57]

J. D. Bekenstein,The Relation between physical and gravitational geometry, Phys. Rev. D 48(1993) 3641 [arXiv:gr-qc/9211017]

1993 arXiv
[58]

Ben Achour,Dhost theories as disformal gravity: from black holes to radiative spacetimes, Eur

J. Ben Achour,Dhost theories as disformal gravity: from black holes to radiative spacetimes, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 424 [arXiv:2412.04135]

2025 arXiv
[59]

Armendariz-Picon and E

C. Armendariz-Picon and E. A. Lim,Haloes of k-essence, JCAP08(2005) 007 [arXiv:astro-ph/0505207]

2005 arXiv
[60]

Babichev, V

E. Babichev, V. Mukhanov and A. Vikman,k-Essence, superluminal propagation, causality and emergent geometry, JHEP02(2008) 101 [arXiv:0708.0561]

2008 arXiv
[61]

Sawicki, G

I. Sawicki, G. Trenkler and A. Vikman,Causality and stability from acoustic geometry, JHEP10(2025) 227 [arXiv:2412.21169]

2025
[62]

Bettoni and S

D. Bettoni and S. Liberati,Disformal invariance of second order scalar-tensor theories: Framing the Horndeski action, Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 084020 [arXiv:1306.6724]

2013 arXiv
[63]

J. M. Ezquiaga, J. Garc ´ ıa-Bellido and M. Zumalac´ arregui,Field redefinitions in theories beyond Einstein gravity using the language of differential forms, Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 084039 [arXiv:1701.05476]. 49

2017 arXiv
[64]

Jirouˇ sek, K

P. Jirouˇ sek, K. Shimada, A. Vikman and M. Yamaguchi,Disforming to conformal symmetry, JCAP11(2022) 019 [arXiv:2207.12611]

2022 arXiv
[65]

Jirouˇ sek, K

P. Jirouˇ sek, K. Shimada, A. Vikman and M. Yamaguchi,New dynamical degrees of freedom from invertible transformations, JHEP07(2023) 154 [arXiv:2208.05951]

2023 arXiv
[66]

Dom` enech, S

G. Dom` enech, S. Mukohyama, R. Namba, A. Naruko, R. Saitou and Y. Watanabe, Derivative-dependent metric transformation and physical degrees of freedom, Phys. Rev. D 92(2015) 084027 [arXiv:1507.05390]

2015 arXiv
[67]

Chiba, F

T. Chiba, F. Chibana and M. Yamaguchi,Disformal invariance of cosmological observables, JCAP06(2020) 003 [arXiv:2003.10633]

2020 arXiv
[68]

J. B. Achour, A. De Felice, M. A. Gorji, S. Mukohyama and M. C. Pookkillath,Disformal map and Petrov classification in modified gravity, JCAP10(2021) 067 [arXiv:2107.02386]

2021 arXiv
[69]

Takahashi, M

K. Takahashi, M. Minamitsuji and H. Motohashi,Generalized disformal Horndeski theories: Cosmological perturbations and consistent matter coupling, PTEP2023(2023) 013E01 [arXiv:2209.02176]

2023 arXiv
[70]

Takahashi, R

K. Takahashi, R. Kimura and H. Motohashi,Consistency of matter coupling in modified gravity, Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 044018 [arXiv:2212.13391]

2023 arXiv
[71]

Ikeda, K

T. Ikeda, K. Takahashi and T. Kobayashi,Consistency of higher-derivative couplings to matter fields in scalar-tensor gravity, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 044006 [arXiv:2302.03418]

2023 arXiv
[72]

E. A. Lim, I. Sawicki and A. Vikman,Dust of Dark Energy, JCAP05(2010) 012 [arXiv:1003.5751]

2010 arXiv
[73]

A. H. Chamseddine and V. Mukhanov,Mimetic Dark Matter, JHEP11(2013) 135 [arXiv:1308.5410]

2013 arXiv
[74]

A. H. Chamseddine, V. Mukhanov and A. Vikman,Cosmology with Mimetic Matter, JCAP 06(2014) 017 [arXiv:1403.3961]

2014 arXiv
[75]

Golovnev,On the recently proposed Mimetic Dark Matter, Phys

A. Golovnev,On the recently proposed Mimetic Dark Matter, Phys. Lett. B728(2014) 39 [arXiv:1310.2790]

2014 arXiv
[76]

A. O. Barvinsky,Dark matter as a ghost free conformal extension of Einstein theory, JCAP 01(2014) 014 [arXiv:1311.3111]

2014 arXiv
[77]

Deruelle and J

N. Deruelle and J. Rua,Disformal Transformations, Veiled General Relativity and Mimetic Gravity, JCAP09(2014) 002 [arXiv:1407.0825]

2014 arXiv
[78]

Takahashi and T

K. Takahashi and T. Kobayashi,Extended mimetic gravity: Hamiltonian analysis and gradient instabilities, JCAP11(2017) 038 [arXiv:1708.02951]

2017 arXiv
[79]

M. A. Gorji, S. A. Hosseini Mansoori and H. Firouzjahi,Higher Derivative Mimetic Gravity, JCAP01(2018) 020 [arXiv:1709.09988]

2018 arXiv
[80]

Langlois, M

D. Langlois, M. Mancarella, K. Noui and F. Vernizzi,Mimetic gravity as DHOST theories, JCAP02(2019) 036 [arXiv:1802.03394]. 50

2019 arXiv
[81]

M. A. Gorji, S. Mukohyama, H. Firouzjahi and S. A. Hosseini Mansoori,Gauge Field Mimetic Cosmology, JCAP08(2018) 047 [arXiv:1807.06335]

2018 arXiv
[82]

Firouzjahi, M

H. Firouzjahi, M. A. Gorji, S. A. Hosseini Mansoori, A. Karami and T. Rostami,Two-field disformal transformation and mimetic cosmology, JCAP11(2018) 046 [arXiv:1806.11472]

2018 arXiv
[83]

M. A. Gorji, A. Allahyari, M. Khodadi and H. Firouzjahi,Mimetic black holes, Phys. Rev. D 101(2020) 124060 [arXiv:1912.04636]

2020 arXiv
[84]

M. A. Gorji, S. Jana and P. Petrov,Abelian and non-Abelian mimetic black holes, JCAP04 (2026) 015 [arXiv:2511.22062]

2026
[85]

M. A. Gorji,Imperfect dark matter with higher derivatives, JCAP05(2026) 041 [arXiv:2510.23838]

2026 arXiv
[86]

Allahyari, C

A. Allahyari, C. Donio, M. A. Gorji, Z. Gorji and J. T. Firouzjaee,Fragility of stealth solutions in mimetic gravity,arXiv:2606.31274

arXiv
[87]

Jirouˇ sek and A

P. Jirouˇ sek and A. Vikman,New Weyl-invariant vector-tensor theory for the cosmological constant, JCAP04(2019) 004 [arXiv:1811.09547]

2019 arXiv
[88]

Hammer, P

K. Hammer, P. Jirousek and A. Vikman,Axionic cosmological constant,arXiv:2001.03169

2001 arXiv
[89]

Einstein,Spielen Gravitationsfelder im Aufbau der materiellen Elementarteilchen eine wesentliche Rolle?, Sitzungsber

A. Einstein,Spielen Gravitationsfelder im Aufbau der materiellen Elementarteilchen eine wesentliche Rolle?, Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (Math. Phys. )1919(1919) 349

1919
[90]

Henneaux and C

M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim,The Cosmological Constant and General Covariance, Phys. Lett. B222(1989) 195

1989
[91]

S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis,The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 2, 2023, 10.1017/9781009253161

2023 doi
[92]

Mart ´ ın-Moruno and M

P. Mart ´ ın-Moruno and M. Visser,Generalized Rainich conditions, generalized stress-energy conditions, and the Hawking-Ellis classification, Class. Quant. Grav.34(2017) 225014 [arXiv:1707.04172]

2017 arXiv
[93]

Martin-Moruno and M

P. Martin-Moruno and M. Visser,Essential core of the Hawking–Ellis types, Class. Quant. Grav.35(2018) 125003 [arXiv:1802.00865]

2018 arXiv
[94]

Martin-Moruno and M

P. Martin-Moruno and M. Visser,Hawking–Ellis type III spacetime geometry, Class. Quant. Grav.35(2018) 185004 [arXiv:1806.02094]

2018 arXiv
[95]

Mart ´ ın-Moruno and M

P. Mart ´ ın-Moruno and M. Visser,The type III stress-energy tensor: ugly duckling of the Hawking–Ellis classification, Class. Quant. Grav.37(2020) 015013 [arXiv:1907.01269]

2020 arXiv
[96]

M. A. Gorji, S. Mukohyama and H. Firouzjahi,Cosmology in Mimetic SU(2) Gauge Theory, JCAP05(2019) 019 [arXiv:1903.04845]

2019 arXiv
[97]

J. B. Carrell,Groups, Matrices, and Vector Spaces: A Group Theoretic Approach to Linear Algebra. New York, NY: Springer, 2017

2017
[98]

S. F. Hassan and M. Kocic,On the local structure of spacetime in ghost-free bimetric theory and massive gravity, JHEP05(2018) 099 [arXiv:1706.07806]. 51

2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [4]

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

1974

[2] [5]

Chiba, T

T. Chiba, T. Okabe and M. Yamaguchi,Kinetically driven quintessence, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 023511 [arXiv:astro-ph/9912463]

arXiv 2000

[3] [6]

Armendariz-Picon, T

C. Armendariz-Picon, T. Damour and V. F. Mukhanov,k - inflation, Phys. Lett. B458 (1999) 209 [arXiv:hep-th/9904075]

arXiv 1999

[4] [7]

Garriga and V

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

arXiv 1999

[5] [8]

Armendariz-Picon, V

C. Armendariz-Picon, V. F. Mukhanov and P. J. Steinhardt,A Dynamical solution to the problem of a small cosmological constant and late time cosmic acceleration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85(2000) 4438 [arXiv:astro-ph/0004134]

arXiv 2000

[6] [9]

Armendariz-Picon, V

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

arXiv 2001

[7] [10]

Nicolis, R

A. Nicolis, R. Rattazzi and E. Trincherini,The Galileon as a local modification of gravity, Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 064036 [arXiv:0811.2197]

arXiv 2009

[8] [11]

Deffayet, S

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

arXiv 2009