Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 6 cited by

The Hubble tension is a real crisis that pure early-only or late-only fixes cannot solve; remaining routes are interacting dark energy or new physics at the local-to-homogeneous transition.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-15 10:40 UTC pith:JFFQ6PNS

load-bearing objection Solid observational map of a real H0 crisis; the residual-solution narrowing is coherent advocacy, not a closed theorem. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2606.20434 v2 pith:JFFQ6PNS submitted 2026-06-18 astro-ph.CO

The Hubble tension: A decade review

Rong-Gen Cai , Shao-Jiang Wang This is my paper
classification astro-ph.CO
keywords Hubble tensionΛCDMsound horizonabsolute magnitudeinverse distance ladderinteracting dark energychameleon dark energyearly dark energy
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 decade review argues that the gap between early-Universe and late-Universe determinations of the present expansion rate is no longer a fluke of one satellite or one distance ladder. Early-only fixes that shrink the sound horizon force correlated changes to the primordial spectrum and to late structure growth, while late-only fixes that alter supernova absolute magnitude—whether intrinsically or through a phantom-like expansion history—are tightly blocked by inverse distance ladders and the cosmic distance duality relation. Local voids large enough to fake a high local expansion rate are already ruled out. The authors therefore point remaining viable routes toward interacting dark energy that couples early and late modifications, or toward new physics operating where local inhomogeneity meets large-scale homogeneity, such as chameleon-like or scale-dependent dark energy. A sympathetic reader cares because the review reframes the tension as a structural crisis of the standard model rather than a single-probe glitch, and it narrows the model space to classes that can be tested jointly with sound-horizon, intercept, growth, and local-environment data.

Core claim

The paper establishes that the Hubble-constant discrepancy persists whether or not early constraints use Planck CMB and whether or not late measurements use a full three-rung distance ladder, and that pure early-Universe sound-horizon solutions and pure late-Universe absolute-magnitude solutions are each blocked by no-go constraints, leaving interacting dark energy (combining early and late modifications) or new physics at the inhomogeneity-to-homogeneity transition as the remaining reviewed options.

What carries the argument

Early-time and late-time no-go theorems: early fixes that only reduce the sound horizon force higher cold-dark-matter density and worsen structure-growth tensions unless the primordial spectrum and late Universe are also modified; late fixes that only change supernova absolute magnitude are constrained by inverse distance ladders and the cosmic distance duality relation. These theorems carry the argument that only correlated interacting-dark-energy or transition-scale physics remains viable.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that the early-time and late-time no-go arguments close enough of the model space that only interacting dark energy or local transition-scale physics remain viable, rather than merely constraining simpler homogeneous or early-only models under the datasets and priors used.

What would settle it

A joint analysis in which a pure early-only sound-horizon model simultaneously fits CMB acoustic scales, BAO, supernova intercepts, and growth (S8/γ) without residual tension, or a pure late homogeneous modification that raises H0 while preserving inverse-distance-ladder absolute magnitude and the cosmic distance duality relation; either outcome would break the no-go framing.

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

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 / 5 minor

Summary. This decade review argues that the Hubble tension is a genuine crisis of ΛCDM, independent of Planck-only CMB and of full three-rung distance ladders. Sec. 2 compiles early-Universe H0 constraints (Planck, ACT, SPT, multipole splits, BAO+BBN) and late-Universe measurements (Cepheid/TRGB/SBF/Mira ladders, two-rung ladders, megamasers, SLTD, GW sirens). Sec. 3 frames pure early solutions as sound-horizon reduction that forces higher ωc, S8, and ns o1 (“early-time no-go theorems”), and pure late solutions as intrinsic or effective MB changes blocked by inverse distance ladders, CDDR, and intercept balance (Eqs. 3.4–3.6; “late-time no-go theorems”). Local voids are dismissed. Sec. 4 then reviews residual routes: correlated early–late physics (EDE+DDE, NEDE, IDE) and local-scale physics (intercept/slope tensions, chameleon DE, scale-dependent Λ). The abstract and conclusions present interacting dark energy and inhomogeneity-to-homogeneity transition models as the remaining viable options.

Significance. If the observational synthesis holds, the paper is a useful, up-to-date map of H0 constraints and of why simple one-sector extensions fail under standard dataset combinations. The compilation of non-Planck CMB, BAO+BBN, two-rung ladders, and ladder-free probes (Figs. 1–2, Tables) is valuable for the community. The intercept-balance argument and the effective-vs-apparent EoS distinction in IDE (Sec. 4.1.3) are pedagogically clear. The manuscript does not ship machine-checked proofs or public code; its main deliverable is a structured narrative that narrows residual model space toward correlated IDE and local chameleon-like scenarios. That narrowing is of high interest if framed as a review of constraints under stated priors rather than as closed theorems.

major comments (3)
  1. [Secs. 3.1.2, 3.2.2; abstract; Sec. 5] Secs. 3.1.2 and 3.2.2 (and abstract/conclusions): the labels “early-time no-go theorems” and “late-time no-go theorems” overstate the logical status of the arguments. The early-side case (higher ωc and S8 once Ωm is fixed by BAO/SNe; ns o1 for EDE-class models) and the late-side case (IDL+CDDR+intercept balance, Eqs. 3.4–3.6; PAge+CC) are strong constraints under the authors’ preferred combinations, but the text itself notes data/prior dependence (ACT vs SPT/Planck NPIPE, DESI+lensing, ~2σ CDDR room). Reframe as “strong constraints under stated model classes and priors” and state residual viable space (e.g. me+CPL, some NEDE/EDE variants) so the jump to “only IDE or local transition remain” is not presented as exhaustive.
  2. [Sec. 4; Sec. 5] Sec. 4 and conclusions: the residual-resolution claim is structured so that the “remaining options” coincide with the authors’ program (intercept/slope tensions [81–84,126], chameleon DE [129], scale-dependent Λ). That is legitimate advocacy in a review, but the manuscript should separate (i) literature consensus that pure early-only and pure homogeneous late-only models are under pressure from (ii) the authors’ preferred residual class. Explicitly list competing residual routes still active in the DESI-era literature (e.g. me+CPL, NEDE variants, modified recombination + DDE) and the observational tests that would discriminate them from chameleon/IDE.
  3. [Sec. 4.2] Sec. 4.2.1–4.2.3: the slope (δH0) tension and chameleon / scale-dependent-Λ picture are presented as a natural residual resolution, but the supporting detection is cited as arXiv:2209.14732 and the model as a short letter. For a decade review, either (a) give a self-contained quantitative summary of the slope measurement (sample, R-scale, significance, systematics) and of how chameleon DE fits CMB+BAO+SNe without spoiling growth, or (b) mark this subsection clearly as a speculative outlook rather than a peer-reviewed consensus residual. As written, the load-bearing claim that local-scale new physics “explains” the tension as a phenomenon is under-supported relative to Secs. 2–3.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figs. 1–2] Figs. 1–2 are dense; a short table of consensus early vs late H0 anchors (Planck+ACT+SPT; H0DN; SH0ES; BAO+BBN) would help readers who will not parse every entry.
  2. [Sec. 3.2.3] Notation: −5aB, aB, and intercept are used interchangeably; define once and stick to one symbol in Sec. 3.2.3.
  3. [References] Several arXiv-only or very recent citations (e.g. 2025–2026 DESI/SPT/JWST entries) will need version/DOI updates at proof; flag which results are still preliminary.
  4. [Throughout] Typos/style: “concordant cosmology,” “Alcock-Paczy´ nski,” and occasional missing spaces around citations; a light copy-edit pass is needed.
  5. [Sec. 2.2.3] Sec. 2.2.3: GW dark/spectral siren constraints are still too broad to adjudicate H0; state that explicitly when listing them alongside SH0ES/Planck.

Circularity Check

4 steps flagged

Review’s dilemma-to-resolution path is load-bearing on the authors’ own no-go, intercept, slope-tension, and chameleon papers; observational crisis is external, so not equation-level circularity.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Abstract; Sec. 1; Sec. 4 opening]
    "In view of this dilemma, we review in this paper alternative resolutions involving interacting dark energy models, either combining early-time and late-time modifications or operating at the transition from inhomogeneity to homogeneity scales. ... The theoretical dilemma is organized with a series of arguments forming "No-Go Theorems" for both early-Universe and late-Universe solutions alone. Therefore, the alternative resolutions seem to favor either combined early-late modifications or local-scale new physics ... after appreciating both "early-time no-go theorems" [33, 37, 38, 40–42, 45] and"

    The review’s central narrowing—from crisis to “only correlated IDE or local transition remain viable”—is justified by packaging constraints as no-go theorems whose late-time half and the local-resolution half rest heavily on the authors’ own series, then reviewing those same resolutions. The observational discrepancy is external; the forced residual option set is not.

  2. self citation load bearing [Sec. 3.2.2 Late-time no-go theorems; Sec. 3.2.3]
    "This is the essential argument for the late-time no-go formulation [75–81]. ... With this improved inverse distance ladder [78, 79, 81], the cosmological constraints on H0, MB, and rd are almost indistinguishable for both PAge and phantom dark energy transition models with respect to the ΛCDM model. ... we further test in Ref. [81] whether the remaining new physics could reside in the local Universe ... This local-late aB tension was later confirmed ... in Ref. [82] ... See the recent mini-review [84] for a concise summary of these intercept tensions."

    The claim that homogeneous late modifications are generically closed (so only local/intercept or IDE remain) is load-bearing on the authors’ own IDL/PAge and intercept-tension papers [78,79,81–84], cited as establishing the no-go and the aB diagnosis that then motivates their preferred residual physics.

  3. self citation load bearing [Sec. 4.2.1–4.2.2; Sec. 5 Conclusions]
    "For the Hubble bias from arbitrary sample distributions [126], there is a very special case. ... We call this conflict the slope (δH0) tension. ... A theoretical model that naturally generates such a positive correlation between the Hubble constant and the local density contrast is the chameleon dark energy model [129]. ... the slope tension hints at an opposite deviation from the ΛCDM model for a locally faster expansion rate in denser regions, reminiscent of the late-time chameleon-like dark energy model that admits a larger effective cosmological constant for a larger density contrast [129]"

    The “remaining” local-scale resolution is introduced as the model that matches the authors’ own sample-variance/slope-tension detection [126] and is identified with their chameleon DE paper [129]. The review’s endpoint thus coincides with their prior construction rather than an independently forced uniqueness result.

  4. uniqueness imported from authors [Sec. 1; Sec. 3 headers 3.1.2 and 3.2.2]
    "the theoretical dilemma is organized with a series of arguments forming "No-Go Theorems" for both early-Universe and late-Universe solutions alone. ... Early-time no-go theorems ... Late-time no-go theorems ... after appreciating both "early-time no-go theorems" [33, 37, 38, 40–42, 45] and "late-time no-go theorems" [75–84]."

    Labeling the authors’ preferred constraint package (including their IDL/intercept papers) as “No-Go Theorems” imports theorem-like uniqueness/forcefulness from their own framing and citations, then treats pure early-only and pure late-homogeneous options as closed so that only their residual program remains—without an external uniqueness proof that exhausts the model space under all priors.

full rationale

This is a decade review, not a first-principles derivation. Section 2’s early/late H0 compilation is independent of the authors. Early-time constraints also cite external no-go literature (Jedamzik, Vagnozzi, Hill, etc.). Late-time inverse-distance-ladder and intercept arguments mix external work (Benevento, Camarena, Efstathiou, Keeley) with the authors’ PAge/CC and aB papers. There is no self-definitional identity, no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no machine-checked uniqueness theorem that forces their model by construction. The circularity that does exist is narrative and load-bearing self-citation: the paper organizes the field as blocked by “No-Go Theorems,” then presents remaining viable routes as correlated IDE and local chameleon / scale-dependent Λ—precisely the authors’ prior program ([78–84], [126], [129]). They partly flag this (“inevitably biased perspective”), which lowers severity. Score 4: self-citation structures the central “remaining options” claim without collapsing the observational crisis or all constraints into a tautology.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 5 axioms · 2 invented entities

A review inherits standard cosmological domain assumptions and the authors’ prior theoretical constructs rather than fitting new free parameters. Load-bearing content is the observational claim of a systematic early-vs-late H0 split plus the generality of early/late no-go arguments and the viability of IDE/chameleon residual models.

axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Flat ΛCDM (or mild extensions) is the correct baseline for translating CMB/BAO/BBN into H0 and for defining the sound-horizon and absolute-magnitude tensions.
    Used throughout Sec. 2–3 to define early-Universe global fits and the rs/MB reformulations of the tension.
  • domain assumption Cosmic distance duality relation holds sufficiently well that inverse distance ladders tightly constrain homogeneous late-time modifications of dL(z) or MB.
    Central to late-time no-go arguments in Sec. 3.2.2 and abstract.
  • domain assumption BAO+BBN (and non-Planck CMB) provide early-Universe H0 anchors independent enough of Planck systematics to establish a crisis, not a Planck artifact.
    Sec. 2.1.2–2.1.3; underpins the “regardless of Planck” claim.
  • ad hoc to paper Authors’ prior late-time no-go and intercept-tension analyses correctly leave little room for homogeneous late transitions inside the Hubble-flow regime.
    Secs. 3.2.2–3.2.3 lean on Refs. [75–84] as if generically closing late-only solutions.
  • domain assumption Local void / Hubble-bubble contributions are negligible for Hubble-flow SN samples (z ≳ 0.023).
    Sec. 4.2.1 and abstract; standard but load-bearing for discarding pure local GR voids.
invented entities (2)
  • Chameleon dark energy / scale-dependent effective cosmological constant (Λ_L CDM picture) no independent evidence
    purpose: Explain positive correlation of measured H0 with sample density and reframe the tension as an environmental/scale-dependent phenomenon rather than a single wrong H0.
    Promoted in Sec. 4.2.2–4.2.3 and conclusions from authors’ prior work; independent_evidence false within this review (no new falsifying test shipped here).
  • Intercept (−5aB) tension and slope (δH0) tension as distinct diagnostics no independent evidence
    purpose: Sharpen the crisis beyond H0/MB labels and motivate local-to-homogeneous transition physics.
    Sec. 3.2.3 and 4.2.1; named diagnostics from authors’ program, not new particles but new claimed observables.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 60771 in / 3323 out tokens · 35324 ms · 2026-07-15T10:40:27.869597+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Ever since the new millennium, precision cosmology has forged the $\Lambda$-cold-dark-matter ($\Lambda$CDM) model as the standard model of concordant cosmology, withstanding various tests except for an ever-enlarging discrepancy between early-Universe observations and late-Universe measurements on the current Hubble expansion rate of our observable Universe. This Hubble-constant tension has likely become a real crisis for modern cosmology, with the discrepancy persisting regardless of whether the early-Universe observations depend on \textit{Planck} CMB or not, and the late-Universe measurements depend on distance ladders at all. If the Hubble tension originates from a different early Universe, its resolutions pertain to shrinking the sound horizon by altering either early expansion or recombination histories, but at the same time necessitating modifications to both primordial and late Universe altogether. Alternatively, if the Hubble tension arises from a different late Universe, its resolutions operate by changing the absolute magnitude of supernovae either intrinsically or effectively, both of which have been strongly constrained by the inverse distance ladders with the cosmic distance duality relation. The remaining options seem to turn to our local Universe, but a local Hubble bubble or cosmic void solution has long been ruled out as a significant contribution to the Hubble tension. In view of this dilemma, we review in this paper alternative resolutions involving interacting dark energy models, either combining early-time and late-time modifications or operating at the transition from inhomogeneity to homogeneity scales.

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 6 Pith papers

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

  1. General Relativistic Entropic Acceleration at the perturbation level: a CLASS implementation and first Boltzmann-code constraints

    gr-qc 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    First full Boltzmann-code implementation of entropic dark energy, with MCMC constraints from CMB+BAO+SN, yields α≈1 and a fit statistically indistinguishable from ΛCDM.

  2. Can Distance Duality Violation Save Late-time Solutions to the Hubble Tension?

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0

    For fixed sound-horizon and supernova calibrations, no late-time modification—even one violating cosmic distance duality—can resolve the Hubble tension, because the required ~8-10% CDDR violation is excluded by BAO, c...

  3. Gravitational Lensing in a Kasner Background: Distinguishing Wormholes and Black Holes

    gr-qc 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    In a Kasner (anisotropic) universe, wormhole and black-hole lenses produce different directional splits of the Einstein-like scale, while the full critical curves remain nearly circular.

  4. Hubble tension in k-essence: Evidence for robust tension alleviation

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    Dilaton and tachyon k-essence models robustly reduce Planck–late-Universe H0 tension to 0.14σ and 0.69σ without dataset-dependent fine-tuning of model parameters.

  5. Running into tension: primordial black holes from ultra-slow-roll inflation, spectral running, and the Hubble tension

    astro-ph.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    EDE models increase inferred α_s from CMB data, strengthening tension with USR PBH models that predict negative running.

  6. Neutrino mass constraints in the Schwarzschild-de Sitter black-hole dark energy model with ACT DR6 and DESI DR2 data

    astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.5

    SdSDE dark energy yields a ~0.16–0.21 eV positive neutrino-mass preference with DESI+ACT data, but χ² strongly favors extended ΛCDM and the shift is likely compensation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

300 extracted references · 271 linked inside Pith · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Di Valentino, A

    E. Di Valentino, A. Melchiorri and J. Silk,Reconciling Planck with the local value ofH 0 in extended parameter space,Phys. Lett.B761(2016) 242–246, [1606.00634]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  2. [2]

    Karwal and M

    T. Karwal and M. Kamionkowski,Dark energy at early times, the Hubble parameter, and the string axiverse,Phys. Rev.D94(2016) 103523, [1608.01309]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    R. B. Tully,The Hubble Constant: A Historical Review,2305.11950. – 47 – [4]HSTcollaboration, W. L. Freedman et al.,Final results from the Hubble Space Telescope key project to measure the Hubble constant,Astrophys. J.553(2001) 47–72, [astro-ph/0012376]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  4. [4]

    Moresco et al.,Unveiling the Universe with emerging cosmological probes,Living Rev

    M. Moresco et al.,Unveiling the Universe with emerging cosmological probes,Living Rev. Rel. 25(2022) 6, [2201.07241]. [6]Planckcollaboration, P. A. R. Ade et al.,Planck 2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.571(2014) A16, [1303.5076]. [7]WMAPcollaboration, G. Hinshaw et al.,Nine-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Obser...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    A. G. Riess, L. Macri, S. Casertano, H. Lampeitl, H. C. Ferguson, A. V. Filippenko et al.,A 3% Solution: Determination of the Hubble Constant with the Hubble Space Telescope and Wide Field Camera 3,Astrophys. J.730(2011) 119, [1103.2976]. [9]Planckcollaboration, P. A. R. Ade et al.,Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.594(2...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  6. [6]

    A. G. Riess et al.,A 2.4% Determination of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant, Astrophys. J.826(2016) 56, [1604.01424]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  7. [7]

    A. G. Riess et al.,Milky Way Cepheid Standards for Measuring Cosmic Distances and Application to Gaia DR2: Implications for the Hubble Constant,Astrophys. J.861(2018) 126, [1804.10655]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    A. G. Riess et al.,New Parallaxes of Galactic Cepheids from Spatially Scanning the Hubble Space Telescope: Implications for the Hubble Constant,Astrophys. J.855(2018) 136, [1801.01120]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  9. [9]

    A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. M. Macri and D. Scolnic,Large Magellanic Cloud Cepheid Standards Provide a 1% Foundation for the Determination of the Hubble Constant and Stronger Evidence for Physics Beyond LambdaCDM,Astrophys. J.876(2019) 85, [1903.07603]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  10. [10]

    A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, J. B. Bowers, L. Macri, J. C. Zinn et al.,Cosmic Distances Calibrated to 1% Precision with Gaia EDR3 Parallaxes and Hubble Space Telescope Photometry of 75 Milky Way Cepheids Confirm Tension withΛCDM,Astrophys. J. Lett.908 (2021) L6, [2012.08534]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  11. [11]

    A. G. Riess et al.,A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km/s/Mpc Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team, Astrophys. J. Lett.934(2022) L7, [2112.04510]. [16]Planckcollaboration, N. Aghanim et al.,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6, [1807.06209]. [1...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  12. [12]

    R.-G. Cai, L. Li and S.-J. Wang,Hubble-constant crisis,Acta Phys. Sin.72(2023) 239801

    2023

  13. [13]

    J. L. Bernal, L. Verde and A. G. Riess,The trouble withH 0,JCAP1610(2016) 019, [1607.05617]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  14. [14]

    Verde, T

    L. Verde, T. Treu and A. G. Riess,Tensions between the Early and the Late Universe,Nature Astron.3(7, 2019) 891, [1907.10625]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  15. [15]

    Knox and M

    L. Knox and M. Millea,Hubble constant hunter’s guide,Phys. Rev.D101(2020) 043533, [1908.03663]. – 48 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    A. G. Riess,The Expansion of the Universe is Faster than Expected,Nature Rev. Phys.2 (2019) 10–12, [2001.03624]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  17. [17]

    W. L. Freedman,Measurements of the Hubble Constant: Tensions in Perspective,Astrophys. J.919(2021) 16, [2106.15656]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    Perivolaropoulos and F

    L. Perivolaropoulos and F. Skara,Challenges forΛCDM: An update,New Astron. Rev.95 (2022) 101659, [2105.05208]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  19. [19]

    Bull et al.,BeyondΛCDM: Problems, solutions, and the road ahead,Phys

    P. Bull et al.,BeyondΛCDM: Problems, solutions, and the road ahead,Phys. Dark Univ.12 (2016) 56–99, [1512.05356]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  20. [20]

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

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  21. [21]

    Di Valentino, O

    E. Di Valentino, O. Mena, S. Pan, L. Visinelli, W. Yang, A. Melchiorri et al.,In the realm of the Hubble tension—a review of solutions,Class. Quant. Grav.38(2021) 153001, [2103.01183]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    Sch¨ oneberg, G

    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(2022) 1–55, [2107.10291]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    P. Shah, P. Lemos and O. Lahav,A buyer’s guide to the Hubble constant,Astron. Astrophys. Rev.29(2021) 9, [2109.01161]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    E. Abdalla et al.,Cosmology intertwined: A review of the particle physics, astrophysics, and cosmology associated with the cosmological tensions and anomalies,JHEAp34(2022) 49–211, [2203.06142]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  25. [25]

    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 constraints circa 2023,Phys. Dark Univ. 42(2023) 101348, [2302.09032]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    Hu and F.-Y

    J.-P. Hu and F.-Y. Wang,Hubble Tension: The Evidence of New Physics,Universe9(2023) 94, [2302.05709]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  27. [27]

    Vagnozzi,Seven Hints That Early-Time New Physics Alone Is Not Sufficient to Solve the Hubble Tension,Universe9(2023) 393, [2308.16628]

    S. Vagnozzi,Seven Hints That Early-Time New Physics Alone Is Not Sufficient to Solve the Hubble Tension,Universe9(2023) 393, [2308.16628]. [34]CosmoVerse Networkcollaboration, E. Di Valentino et al.,The CosmoVerse White Paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics,Phys. Dark Univ.49(2025) 101965, [2504.01669]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    Aylor, M

    K. Aylor, M. Joy, L. Knox, M. Millea, S. Raghunathan and W. L. K. Wu,Sounds Discordant: Classical Distance Ladder\&ΛCDM -based Determinations of the Cosmological Sound Horizon,Astrophys. J.874(2019) 4, [1811.00537]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  29. [29]

    Jiang, D

    J.-Q. Jiang, D. Pedrotti, S. S. da Costa and S. Vagnozzi,Nonparametric late-time expansion history reconstruction and implications for the Hubble tension in light of recent DESI and type Ia supernovae data,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 123519, [2408.02365]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Krishnan, E

    C. Krishnan, E. O. Colg´ ain, Ruchika, A. A. Sen, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari and T. Yang,Is there an early Universe solution to Hubble tension?,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 103525, [2002.06044]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  31. [31]

    Jedamzik, L

    K. Jedamzik, L. Pogosian and G.-B. Zhao,Why reducing the cosmic sound horizon alone can not fully resolve the Hubble tension,Commun. in Phys.4(2021) 123, [2010.04158]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  32. [32]

    J. C. Hill, E. McDonough, M. W. Toomey and S. Alexander,Early dark energy does not restore cosmological concordance,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 043507, [2003.07355]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  33. [33]

    W. Lin, X. Chen and K. J. Mack,Early Universe Physics Insensitive and Uncalibrated Cosmic Standards: Constraints onΩm and Implications for the Hubble Tension,Astrophys. J. 920(2021) 159, [2102.05701]. – 49 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Vagnozzi,Consistency tests ofΛCDM from the early integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect: Implications for early-time new physics and the Hubble tension,Phys

    S. Vagnozzi,Consistency tests ofΛCDM from the early integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect: Implications for early-time new physics and the Hubble tension,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 063524, [2105.10425]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  35. [35]

    O. H. E. Philcox, G. S. Farren, B. D. Sherwin, E. J. Baxter and D. J. Brout,Determining the Hubble constant without the sound horizon: A 3.6% constraint on H0 from galaxy surveys, CMB lensing, and supernovae,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 063530, [2204.02984]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  36. [36]

    Kamionkowski and A

    M. Kamionkowski and A. G. Riess,The Hubble Tension and Early Dark Energy,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.73(2023) 153–180, [2211.04492]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    A. R. Khalife, M. B. Zanjani, S. Galli, S. G¨ unther, J. Lesgourgues and K. Benabed,Review of Hubble tension solutions with new SH0ES and SPT-3G data,2312.09814

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  38. [38]

    Pedrotti, J.-Q

    D. Pedrotti, J.-Q. Jiang, L. A. Escamilla, S. S. da Costa and S. Vagnozzi,Multidimensionality of the Hubble tension: The roles ofΩm andωc,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 023506, [2408.04530]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    F. J. Qu, K. M. Surrao, B. Bolliet, J. C. Hill, B. D. Sherwin, H. T. Jense et al.,Accelerated inference on accelerated cosmic expansion: New constraints on axionlike early dark energy with DESI BAO and ACT DR6 CMB lensing,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 123507, [2404.16805]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Poulin, T

    V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, R. Calder´ on and T. Simon,Impact of ACT DR6 and DESI DR2 for early dark energy and the Hubble tension,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 063519, [2505.08051]. [48]SPT-3Gcollaboration, A. R. Khalife et al.,SPT-3G D1: Axion Early Dark Energy with CMB experiments and DESI,2507.23355

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  41. [41]

    Toda and O

    Y. Toda and O. Seto,Constraints on the varying electron mass and early dark energy in light of ACT DR6 and DESI DR2 and the implications for inflation,JCAP02(2026) 019, [2508.09025]

    arXiv 2026

  42. [42]

    Wang and Y.-S

    H. Wang and Y.-S. Piao,Dark energy after pre-recombination early dark energy in light of DESI DR2 and the latest ACT and SPT data,2511.16606

    arXiv

  43. [43]

    Yin, G.-H

    L. Yin, G.-H. Du, T.-N. Li and X. Zhang,Joint constraints on cosmic birefringence and early dark energy from ACT, Planck, DESI, and PantheonPlus,2601.13624

    arXiv

  44. [44]

    Bella, V

    M. Bella, V. Poulin, S. Vagnozzi and L. Knox,Double the axions, half the tension: multi-field early dark energy eases the Hubble tension,2604.13535

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  45. [45]

    Braglia, W

    M. Braglia, W. T. Emond, F. Finelli, A. E. Gumrukcuoglu and K. Koyama,Unified framework for early dark energy fromα-attractors,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 083513, [2005.14053]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  46. [46]

    Takahashi and W

    F. Takahashi and W. Yin,Cosmological implications of ns=1 in light of the Hubble tension, Phys. Lett. B830(2022) 137143, [2112.06710]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  47. [47]

    Ye, J.-Q

    G. Ye, J.-Q. Jiang and Y.-S. Piao,Toward inflation with ns=1 in light of the Hubble tension and implications for primordial gravitational waves,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 103528, [2205.02478]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  48. [48]

    Braglia, A

    M. Braglia, A. Linde, R. Kallosh and F. Finelli,Hybridα-attractors, primordial black holes and gravitational wave backgrounds,JCAP04(2023) 033, [2211.14262]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  49. [49]

    Lin,D-term inflation in braneworld models: Consistency with cosmic-string bounds and early-time Hubble tension resolving models,Phys

    C.-M. Lin,D-term inflation in braneworld models: Consistency with cosmic-string bounds and early-time Hubble tension resolving models,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 103511, [2204.10475]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  50. [50]

    Fu and S.-J

    C. Fu and S.-J. Wang,Reconciling early dark energy with a Harrison-Zeldovich spectrum, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) L041304, [2310.12932]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  51. [51]

    C. Fu, D. Lu and S.-J. Wang,Harrison-Zeldovich attractor: From Planck to ACT results, Phys. Rev. D113(2026) L081304, [2510.24682]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  52. [52]

    Poulin, T

    V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, T. Karwal and M. Kamionkowski,Early Dark Energy Can Resolve The Hubble Tension,Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019) 221301, [1811.04083]. – 50 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  53. [53]

    Niedermann and M

    F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth,New early dark energy,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) L041303, [1910.10739]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  54. [54]

    Niedermann and M

    F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth,Resolving the Hubble tension with new early dark energy, Phys. Rev.D102(2020) 063527, [2006.06686]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  55. [55]

    Ye and Y.-S

    G. Ye and Y.-S. Piao,Is the Hubble tension a hint of AdS phase around recombination?,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 083507, [2001.02451]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  56. [56]

    G. Ye, B. Hu and Y.-S. Piao,Implication of the Hubble tension for the primordial Universe in light of recent cosmological data,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 063510, [2103.09729]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  57. [57]

    Jiang and Y.-S

    J.-Q. Jiang and Y.-S. Piao,Toward early dark energy and ns=1 with Planck, ACT, and SPT observations,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 103514, [2202.13379]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Jiang, G

    J.-Q. Jiang, G. Ye and Y.-S. Piao,Return of Harrison-Zeldovich spectrum in light of recent cosmological tensions,2210.06125

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  59. [59]

    Peng and Y.-S

    Z.-Y. Peng and Y.-S. Piao,Testing then s −H 0 scaling relation with Planck-independent CMB data,2308.01012

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  60. [60]

    Vattis, S

    K. Vattis, S. M. Koushiappas and A. Loeb,Dark matter decaying in the late Universe can relieve the H0 tension,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 121302, [1903.06220]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  61. [61]

    K. L. Pandey, T. Karwal and S. Das,Alleviating theH 0 andσ 8 anomalies with a decaying dark matter model,JCAP07(2020) 026, [1902.10636]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  62. [62]

    S. J. Clark, K. Vattis and S. M. Koushiappas,Cosmological constraints on late-universe decaying dark matter as a solution to theH 0 tension,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 043014, [2006.03678]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  63. [63]

    Di Valentino et al.,Cosmology intertwined III:f σ 8 andS 8,Astropart

    E. Di Valentino et al.,Cosmology intertwined III:f σ 8 andS 8,Astropart. Phys.131(2021) 102604, [2008.11285]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  64. [64]

    Poulin, J

    V. Poulin, J. L. Bernal, E. D. Kovetz and M. Kamionkowski,Sigma-8 tension is a drag,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 123538, [2209.06217]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  65. [65]

    Nguyen, D

    N.-M. Nguyen, D. Huterer and Y. Wen,Evidence for Suppression of Structure Growth in the Concordance Cosmological Model,Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 111001, [2302.01331]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  66. [66]

    Poulin, T

    V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, R. Calder´ on and T. Simon,Implications of the cosmic calibration tension beyond H0 and the synergy between early- and late-time new physics,Phys. Rev. D 111(2025) 083552, [2407.18292]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Benevento, W

    G. Benevento, W. Hu and M. Raveri,Can Late Dark Energy Transitions Raise the Hubble constant?,Phys. Rev.D101(2020) 103517, [2002.11707]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  68. [68]

    Camarena and V

    D. Camarena and V. Marra,On the use of the local prior on the absolute magnitude of Type Ia supernovae in cosmological inference,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.504(2021) 5164–5171, [2101.08641]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  69. [69]

    Efstathiou,To H0 or not to H0?,Mon

    G. Efstathiou,To H0 or not to H0?,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.505(2021) 3866–3872, [2103.08723]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  70. [70]

    Cai, Z.-K

    R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo, S.-J. Wang, W.-W. Yu and Y. Zhou,No-go guide for the Hubble tension: Late-time solutions,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) L021301, [2107.13286]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  71. [71]

    Cai, Z.-K

    R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo, S.-J. Wang, W.-W. Yu and Y. Zhou,No-go guide for late-time solutions to the Hubble tension: Matter perturbations,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 063519, [2202.12214]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  72. [72]

    R. E. Keeley and A. Shafieloo,Ruling Out New Physics at Low Redshift as a Solution to the H0 Tension,Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 111002, [2206.08440]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  73. [73]

    Huang, S.-J

    L. Huang, S.-J. Wang and W.-W. Yu,No-go guide for the Hubble tension: Late-time or local-scale new physics,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68(2025) 220413, [2401.14170]. – 51 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Huang, R.-G

    L. Huang, R.-G. Cai, S.-J. Wang, J.-Q. Liu and Y.-H. Yao,Narrowing down the Hubble tension to the first two rungs of distance ladders,Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68(2025) 280405, [2410.06053]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  75. [75]

    Ling, G.-H

    J.-L. Ling, G.-H. Du, T.-N. Li, J.-F. Zhang, S.-J. Wang and X. Zhang,Model-independent cosmological inference after the DESI DR2 data with improved inverse distance ladder,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 083528, [2505.22369]

    arXiv 2025

  76. [76]

    Wang and S.-J

    J.-Q. Wang and S.-J. Wang,Cosmological intercept tension, in25th Hellenic School and Workshops on Elementary Particle Physics and Gravity, 4, 2026.2604.28013

    arXiv 2026

  77. [77]

    A. J. Cuesta, L. Verde, A. Riess and R. Jimenez,Calibrating the cosmic distance scale ladder: the role of the sound horizon scale and the local expansion rate as distance anchors,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.448(2015) 3463–3471, [1411.1094]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  78. [78]

    Heavens, R

    A. Heavens, R. Jimenez and L. Verde,Standard rulers, candles, and clocks from the low-redshift Universe,Phys. Rev. Lett.113(2014) 241302, [1409.6217]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  79. [79]

    Aubourg et al.,Cosmological implications of baryon acoustic oscillation measurements, Phys

    E. Aubourg et al.,Cosmological implications of baryon acoustic oscillation measurements, Phys. Rev.D92(2015) 123516, [1411.1074]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  80. [80]

    Verde, J

    L. Verde, J. L. Bernal, A. F. Heavens and R. Jimenez,The length of the low-redshift standard ruler,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.467(2017) 731–736, [1607.05297]. [89]BOSScollaboration, S. Alam et al.,The clustering of galaxies in the completed SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: cosmological analysis of the DR12 galaxy sample, Mon. Not. Roy. As...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

Showing first 80 references.