pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23563 · v1 · pith:WYJHSORVnew · submitted 2026-06-22 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · gr-qc· hep-th

Unifying the Dark Sector with the New Generalized Chaplygin Gas: Observational Constraints

Abdulla Al Mamon , Andronikos Paliathanasis , Subhajit Saha This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 07:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO gr-qchep-th
keywords generalized Chaplygin gasunified dark sectordark energydark matterobservational constraintsBayesian evidenceΛCDM comparisonDESI data
0
0 comments X

The pith

A generalized Chaplygin gas with redshift-dependent exponent unifies dark matter and dark energy yet remains statistically equivalent to ΛCDM after penalizing extra parameters.

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

The paper tests a single fluid description of the dark sector in which a generalized Chaplygin gas carries a redshift-dependent exponent. Late-time background data from Type Ia supernovae, cosmic chronometers, and DESI DR2 baryon acoustic oscillations are used to constrain the model and compare it directly with ΛCDM. The unified fluid yields higher combined likelihood values, yet both Bayesian evidence and the Akaike Information Criterion find the models indistinguishable once the additional free parameters are taken into account. A reader cares because a working unified model would replace two separate dark components with one dynamical fluid whose behavior is fixed by a single equation of state.

Core claim

Treating the generalized Chaplygin gas with redshift-dependent exponent as a single unified component that accounts for both dark matter and dark energy, the model is fitted to Type Ia supernova, cosmic chronometer, and DESI DR2 BAO data. It produces systematically higher combined likelihoods than ΛCDM, but Bayesian evidence and the Akaike Information Criterion indicate the two descriptions are statistically indistinguishable after the larger number of free parameters is accounted for.

What carries the argument

The generalized Chaplygin gas fluid whose equation-of-state exponent varies with redshift, allowing the same component to mimic both matter-like and dark-energy-like behavior across cosmic time.

If this is right

  • Current late-time data alone cannot distinguish the unified model from ΛCDM once parameter count is penalized.
  • The model remains a viable phenomenological description whose parameters can be bounded by supernova, chronometer, and BAO observations.
  • Any future preference for the generalized Chaplygin gas would require either substantially better data or a different statistical criterion that does not penalize extra parameters as heavily.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If early-universe data such as the CMB power spectrum were added, the extra freedom in the redshift-dependent exponent might produce detectable tensions not visible in background expansion alone.
  • A successful unified fluid of this type would reduce the total number of cosmological parameters only if future observations favor it strongly enough to overcome the current evidence penalty.
  • The redshift dependence of the exponent effectively parametrizes the timing of the matter-to-dark-energy transition, offering a direct handle on that epoch that could be tested with finer redshift-binned BAO measurements.

Load-bearing premise

A single fluid whose exponent changes with redshift can fully replace separate dark-matter and dark-energy components without additional fields or interactions.

What would settle it

A high-redshift expansion-rate measurement or growth-rate datum that lies outside the range reproducible by any choice of the model's free parameters while remaining inside the ΛCDM posterior.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23563 by Abdulla Al Mamon, Andronikos Paliathanasis, Subhajit Saha.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Marginalized posterior contours for the parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The deceleration parameter for the median values and the 68% confidence interval for the posterior variables. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Evolution of the theoretical observables for the NGCG with the BAO DESI DR2 data for the median values of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In light of recent cosmological observations, we examine a generalized Chaplygin gas model with a redshift-dependent exponent as a framework for describing the dark energy and dark matter content of the Universe. Specifically, we treat this fluid as a single unified component and test it against late-time background observational data. We employ Type Ia supernova data, cosmic chronometers, and baryon acoustic oscillations from the second data release of the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument. We perform a Bayesian analysis for parameter estimation and compare the model with $\Lambda$CDM. We find that the generalized Chaplygin gas provides systematically higher values of the combined likelihood; nevertheless, once the larger number of free parameters is taken into account, both the Bayesian evidence and the Akaike Information Criterion suggest that the model is statistically indistinguishable from $\Lambda$CDM.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces a generalized Chaplygin gas model with a redshift-dependent exponent treated as a single unified dark-sector fluid. It performs Bayesian parameter estimation and model comparison against ΛCDM using Type Ia supernova, cosmic chronometer, and DESI DR2 BAO datasets, reporting systematically higher combined likelihood for the new model but statistical equivalence once extra parameters are penalized via Bayesian evidence and AIC.

Significance. If the reported statistical comparison is robust, the work demonstrates that this extended Chaplygin gas can reproduce the late-time expansion history at a level comparable to ΛCDM. The analysis uses public datasets and standard information-criterion methods, providing a transparent example of model selection in background cosmology.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and §2 (model definition): all employed datasets (SNIa, cosmic chronometers, DESI DR2 BAO) probe only z ≲ 2.5. The high-redshift limit required for unification (effective w → 0 and ρ ∝ a^{-3}) is therefore an extrapolation whose functional form is unconstrained by the data; the Bayesian evidence and AIC comparison therefore tests only an effective late-time fluid, not the unification premise itself.
  2. [§3] §3 (likelihood and priors): the manuscript does not provide the explicit functional form of the redshift-dependent exponent, the precise priors on its parameters, or the implementation details of the combined likelihood, preventing independent reproduction or verification of the reported evidence ratios and AIC values.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that the generalized Chaplygin gas yields 'systematically higher values of the combined likelihood' but does not report the numerical Δlnℒ or the exact number of additional free parameters relative to ΛCDM.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

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

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and §2 (model definition): all employed datasets (SNIa, cosmic chronometers, DESI DR2 BAO) probe only z ≲ 2.5. The high-redshift limit required for unification (effective w → 0 and ρ ∝ a^{-3}) is therefore an extrapolation whose functional form is unconstrained by the data; the Bayesian evidence and AIC comparison therefore tests only an effective late-time fluid, not the unification premise itself.

    Authors: We concur that the datasets employed are limited to z ≲ 2.5 and do not directly constrain the high-redshift asymptotic behavior necessary for the dark sector unification. Consequently, the model comparison primarily assesses the viability of the generalized Chaplygin gas as an effective late-time unified fluid rather than validating the full unification scenario. We will revise the abstract and Section 2 to clarify this distinction and emphasize that the high-redshift properties are model assumptions not tested by the current data. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3] §3 (likelihood and priors): the manuscript does not provide the explicit functional form of the redshift-dependent exponent, the precise priors on its parameters, or the implementation details of the combined likelihood, preventing independent reproduction or verification of the reported evidence ratios and AIC values.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee highlighting the need for greater transparency in the methodological details. Upon review, we recognize that while the model is defined in Section 2, the explicit expression for the redshift-dependent exponent and the full prior specifications could be presented more clearly. We will update Section 3 to include the precise functional form of the exponent, the exact prior ranges for all parameters, and additional information on the construction of the combined likelihood function to facilitate independent verification. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: standard model comparison on external data

full rationale

The paper defines a redshift-dependent generalized Chaplygin gas as a unified fluid by assumption, then performs Bayesian parameter estimation and applies AIC plus Bayesian evidence to compare likelihoods against ΛCDM using independent late-time datasets (SNIa, cosmic chronometers, DESI BAO). The higher raw likelihood is acknowledged and the indistinguishability conclusion follows directly from the standard penalization for extra parameters; no step reduces a claimed prediction or uniqueness result to a fitted input by construction, nor relies on self-citation chains or smuggled ansatzes. The statistical test is self-contained and externally benchmarked.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper relies on the standard flat FLRW background cosmology and introduces a specific functional form for the equation of state whose parameters are fitted to data; no independent evidence for the unification assumption is provided beyond the fit quality.

free parameters (2)
  • redshift-dependent exponent parameters
    Additional parameters controlling the redshift variation of the exponent are introduced and fitted to the observational data.
  • Chaplygin gas parameters
    Standard parameters of the generalized Chaplygin gas plus the new redshift-dependent terms are adjusted to match the data.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption A single fluid with the chosen equation of state can describe the entire dark sector.
    Stated explicitly in the abstract as the modeling premise for unification.
  • domain assumption Late-time background observables alone suffice to constrain the model.
    The analysis uses only supernova, chronometer, and BAO data without perturbation or early-universe constraints.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5680 in / 1516 out tokens · 24345 ms · 2026-06-26T07:19:35.217956+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    In the context of General Relativity, this accelerated expansion is widely believed to be driven by the so-called dark energy (DE), which dominates the present cosmic energy budget

    INTRODUCTION Recent cosmological observations indicate that the Universe is currently undergoing a phase of rapid acceleration [1–7]. In the context of General Relativity, this accelerated expansion is widely believed to be driven by the so-called dark energy (DE), which dominates the present cosmic energy budget. The simplest and most commonly adopted mo...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    The concept of unification of the dark sector has been examined before in the context of scalar field cosmology

    UNIFYING THE DARK SECTOR WITH THE NGCG In what follows, we briefly review the NGCG model, which serves as the basis of our cosmological framework and provides a unified-fluid description of the dark sector [23]. The concept of unification of the dark sector has been examined before in the context of scalar field cosmology. A quintessence unified scenario ...

  3. [3]

    Furthermore, the GetDist library 2 is applied for the analysis of the numerical outcomes and plot the confidence space for the posterior variables [90]

    OBSER V A TIONAL DA T A ANAL YSIS For the statistical comparison of the unified model with the cosmological observations, we employ the Bayesian inference framework Cobaya 1 [86, 87] with the PolyChord nested sampler [88, 89], and a custom theory for the computation of the observables. Furthermore, the GetDist library 2 is applied for the analysis of the ...

  4. [4]

    In particular, we employed the NGCG as a unified model for DM and DE, where the effective EoS parameter considered in this work introduces two new free parameters

    CONCLUSIONS We examined the NGCG model as a candidate for describing the dark sector. In particular, we employed the NGCG as a unified model for DM and DE, where the effective EoS parameter considered in this work introduces two new free parameters. The cosmological field equations possess an analytic solution where the Hubble function can be written in a...

  5. [5]

    Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant,

    A. G. Riesset al.(Supernova Search Team), “Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant,” Astron. J. 116, 1009 (1998)

    1998

  6. [6]

    Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High Redshift Supernovae,

    S. Perlmutteret al.(Supernova Cosmology Project), “Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 High Redshift Supernovae,” Astrophys. J. 517, 565 (1999)

    1999

  7. [7]

    A Flat universe from high resolution maps of the cosmic microwave background radiation,

    P. de Bernardiset al.,“A Flat universe from high resolution maps of the cosmic microwave background radiation,” Nature 404, 955 (2000)

    2000

  8. [8]

    The 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey: The Power spectrum and the matter content of the Universe,

    W. J. Percivalet al.,“The 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey: The Power spectrum and the matter content of the Universe,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 327, 1297 (2001)

    2001

  9. [9]

    First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Determination of cosmo- logical parameters,

    D. N. Spergelet al.,“First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Determination of cosmo- logical parameters,” Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148, 175 (2003)

    2003

  10. [10]

    Planck 2015 results XIV. Dark energy and modified gravity,

    P. A. R. Adeet al.(Planck Collaboration), “Planck 2015 results XIV. Dark energy and modified gravity,” Astron. Astro- phys., 594, A14 (2016)

    2015

  11. [11]

    Planck 2018 results VI. Cosmological parameters,

    N. Aghanimet al.(Planck Collaboration), “Planck 2018 results VI. Cosmological parameters,” Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020) [Erratum: Astron. Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

    2018

  12. [12]

    Negative refraction from optical properties of spacetime media,

    O. Luongo, “Negative refraction from optical properties of spacetime media,” Class. Quantum Grav. 42, 225005 (2025)

    2025

  13. [13]

    The cosmological constant problem,

    S. Weinberg, “The cosmological constant problem,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 1 (1989)

    1989

  14. [14]

    Cosmological tracking solutions,

    P. J. Steinhardt, L. Wang, and I. Zlatev, “Cosmological tracking solutions,” Phys. Rev. D 59, 123504 (1999)

    1999

  15. [15]

    A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s −1 Mpc−1 Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team,

    A. G. Riess, W. -L. Yuan, L. M. Macriet al.,“A Comprehensive Measurement of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant with 1 km s −1 Mpc−1 Uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 934, L7 10 (2022)

    2022

  16. [16]

    DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints,

    M. Abdul Karimet al.(DESI Collaboration), “DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints,” Phys. Rev. D 112, 083515 (2025)

    2025

  17. [17]

    DESI DR2 results. I. Baryon acoustic oscillations from the Lyman alpha forest,

    M. Abdul Karimet al.(DESI Collaboration), “DESI DR2 results. I. Baryon acoustic oscillations from the Lyman alpha forest,” Phys. Rev. D 112, 083514 (2025)

    2025

  18. [18]

    Dynamics of dark energy,

    E. J. Copeland, M. Sami, and S. Tsujikawa, “Dynamics of dark energy,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 15, 1753 (2006)

    2006

  19. [19]

    Amendola and S

    L. Amendola and S. Tsujikawa,Dark Energy: Theory and Observations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (2010)

    2010

  20. [20]

    Challenges for ΛCDM: An update,

    L. Perivolaropoulos and F. Skara, “Challenges for ΛCDM: An update,” arXiv:2105.05208 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    The Structure of Structure Formation Theories,

    W. Hu and D. J. Eisenstein, “The Structure of Structure Formation Theories,” Phys. Rev. D 59, 083509 (1999)

    1999

  22. [22]

    An alternative to quintessence,

    A. Kamenshchik, U. Moschella, and V. Pasquier, “An alternative to quintessence,” Phys. Lett. B 511, 265 (2001)

    2001

  23. [23]

    Can the Chaplygin gas be a plausible model for dark energy?,

    V. Gorini, A. Kamenshchik, and U. Moschella, “Can the Chaplygin gas be a plausible model for dark energy?,” Phys. Rev. D 67, 063509 (2003)

    2003

  24. [25]

    Generalized Chaplygin gas, accelerated expansion and dark energy matter unification,

    M. C. Bento, O. Bertolami, and A. A. Sen, “Generalized Chaplygin gas, accelerated expansion and dark energy matter unification,” Phys. Rev. D 66, 043507 (2002)

    2002

  25. [26]

    Revival of the unified dark energy-dark matter model?,

    M. C. Bento, O. Bertolami, A. A. Sen, “Revival of the unified dark energy-dark matter model?,” Phys. Rev. D. 70, 083519 (2004)

    2004

  26. [27]

    New generalized Chaplygin gas as a scheme for unification of dark energy and dark matter,

    X. Zhang, F. Q. Wu, and J. Zhang, “New generalized Chaplygin gas as a scheme for unification of dark energy and dark matter,” JCAP 0601, 003 (2006)

    2006

  27. [28]

    Generalizing the generalized Chaplygin gas,

    A. A. Sen and R. J. Scherrer, “Generalizing the generalized Chaplygin gas,” Phys. Rev. D 72, 063511 (2005)

    2005

  28. [29]

    Accelerated Universe from Modified Chaplygin Gas and Tachyonic Fluid

    H. B. Benaoum, “Accelerated Universe from Modified Chaplygin Gas and Tachyonic Fluid”, Universe 8, 340 (2022)

    2022

  29. [30]

    Role of modified Chaplygin gas in accelerated universe,

    U. Debnath, A. Banerjee, and S. Chakraborty, “Role of modified Chaplygin gas in accelerated universe,” Class. Quantum Grav. 21, 5609 (2004)

    2004

  30. [31]

    Cosmology with a variable Chaplygin gas,

    Z. K. Guo and Y. Z. Zhang, “Cosmology with a variable Chaplygin gas,” Phys. Lett. B 645, 326 (2007)

    2007

  31. [32]

    Constraints on modified Chaplygin gas from recent observations and a comparison of its status with other models,

    J. Lu, L. Xu, J. Li, B. Chang, Y. Gui, and H. Liu, “Constraints on modified Chaplygin gas from recent observations and a comparison of its status with other models,” Phys. Lett. B 662, 87 (2008)

    2008

  32. [33]

    Modified Chaplygin Gas as a Unified Dark Matter and Dark Energy Model and Cosmic Constraints,

    L. Xu, Y. Wang, and H. Noh, “Modified Chaplygin Gas as a Unified Dark Matter and Dark Energy Model and Cosmic Constraints,” Eur. Phys. J. C 72, 1931 (2012)

    1931

  33. [34]

    Interacting Chaplygin gas revisited

    S. Saha, S. Ghosh, and S. Gangopadhyay, “Interacting Chaplygin gas revisited” Mod. Phys. Lett. A 32, 1750109 (2017)

    2017

  34. [35]

    Is the Universe logotropic?,

    P. H. Chavanis, “Is the Universe logotropic?,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus 130, 130 (2015)

    2015

  35. [36]

    The Logotropic Dark Fluid as a unification of dark matter and dark energy,

    P. H. Chavanis, “The Logotropic Dark Fluid as a unification of dark matter and dark energy,” Phys. Lett. B 758, 59 (2016)

    2016

  36. [37]

    New limit on logotropic unified dark energy models,

    V. M. C. Ferreira and P. P. Avelino, “New limit on logotropic unified dark energy models,” Phys. Lett. B 770, 213 (2016)

    2016

  37. [38]

    Extended logotropic fluids as unified dark energy models,

    K. Boshkayev, R. D’Agostino, and O. Luongo, “Extended logotropic fluids as unified dark energy models,” Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 332 (2019)

    2019

  38. [39]

    The Logotropic Dark Fluid: Observational and Thermodynamic Constraints,

    A. Al Mamon and S. Saha, “The Logotropic Dark Fluid: Observational and Thermodynamic Constraints,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 2050097 (2020)

    2020

  39. [40]

    Generalized Logotropic Models and Their Cosmological Constraints,

    H. B. Benaoum, P. H. Chavanis, and H. Quevedo, “Generalized Logotropic Models and Their Cosmological Constraints,” Universe 8, 468 (2022)

    2022

  40. [41]

    The LambertWfunction: A newcomer in the cosmology class?,

    S. Saha and K. Bamba, “The LambertWfunction: A newcomer in the cosmology class?,” Z. Naturforsch. A 75, 23 (2019)

    2019

  41. [42]

    Testing LambertWequation of state with observational hubble parameter data,

    A. Al Mamon and S. Saha, “Testing LambertWequation of state with observational hubble parameter data,” New Astron. 86, 101567 (2021)

    2021

  42. [43]

    Growth of perturbations using LambertWequation of state,

    M. Banerjee, S. Das, A. Al Mamon, S. Saha, and K. Bamba, “Growth of perturbations using LambertWequation of state,” Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys. 18, 2150139 (2021)

    2021

  43. [44]

    The LambertWequation of state in light of DESI BAO,

    V. C. Dubey, S. Saha and A. A. Mamon, “The LambertWequation of state in light of DESI BAO,” arXiv:2601.20972 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  44. [45]

    Dawn of the dark: unified dark sectors and the EDGES Cosmic Dawn 21-cm signal,

    W. Yang, S. Pan, S. Vagnozzi, E. Di Valentino, D. F. Mota, and S. Capozziello, “Dawn of the dark: unified dark sectors and the EDGES Cosmic Dawn 21-cm signal,” JCAP 1911, 044 (2019)

    1911

  45. [46]

    Gravitational waves from two scalar fields unifying the dark sector with inflation,

    O. Luongo, T. Mengoni and P. M. S´ a, “Gravitational waves from two scalar fields unifying the dark sector with inflation,” Phys. Rev. D 113, 023541 (2026)

    2026

  46. [47]

    Indications of a late-time transition to a strongly interacting dark sector,

    A. Paliathanasis, “Indications of a late-time transition to a strongly interacting dark sector,” Phys. Dark Univ. 52, 102306 (2026)

    2026

  47. [48]

    Could quintessence unify the dark sector?,

    A. Paliathanasis, “Could quintessence unify the dark sector?,” Open Astron. 35, 20250021 (2025)

    2025

  48. [49]

    Exploring bulk viscous unified scenarios with gravitational waves standard sirens,

    W. Yang, S. Pan, E. Di Valentino, C. Escamilla-Rivera, and A. Paliathanasis, “Exploring bulk viscous unified scenarios with gravitational waves standard sirens,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 520, 1146 (2023)

    2023

  49. [50]

    Unification of Dark Matter - Dark Energy in Generalized Galileon Theories

    G. Koutsoumbas, K. Ntrekis, E. Papantonopoulos and E. N. Saridakis, “Unification of Dark Matter - Dark Energy in Generalized Galileon Theories”, JCAP 02, 003 (2018)

    2018

  50. [51]

    Unified dark sectors in scalar-torsion theories of gravity

    G. Leon, A. Paliathanasis, E.N. Saridakis and S. Basilakos, “Unified dark sectors in scalar-torsion theories of gravity”, Phys. Rev. D 106, 024055 (2022)

    2022

  51. [52]

    The end of unified dark matter?,

    H. B. Sandvik, M. Tegmark, M. Zaldarriaga, and I. Waga, “The end of unified dark matter?,” Phys. Rev. D 69, 123524 (2004)

    2004

  52. [53]

    Are Chaplygin gases serious contenders for the dark energy?,

    R. Bean and O. Dore, “Are Chaplygin gases serious contenders for the dark energy?,” Phys. Rev. D 68, 023515 (2003)

    2003

  53. [54]

    Generalized Chaplygin gas and CMBR constraints,

    M. C. Bento, O. Bertolami, and A. A. Sen, “Generalized Chaplygin gas and CMBR constraints,” Phys. Rev. D 67, 063003 11 (2003)

    2003

  54. [55]

    WMAP Constraints on the Generalized Chaplygin Gas Model,

    M. C. Bento, O. Bertolami, and A. A. Sen, “WMAP Constraints on the Generalized Chaplygin Gas Model,” Phys. Lett. B 575, 172 (2003)

    2003

  55. [56]

    Latest Supernova data in the framework of Generalized Chaplygin Gas model,

    O. Bertolami, A. A. Sen, S. Sen, and P. T. Silva, “Latest Supernova data in the framework of Generalized Chaplygin Gas model,” Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 353, 329 (2004)

    2004

  56. [57]

    High-redshift objects and the generalized Chaplygin gas,

    J. S. Alcaniz, D. Jain, and A. Dev, “High-redshift objects and the generalized Chaplygin gas,” Phys. Rev. D 67, 043514 (2003)

    2003

  57. [58]

    Supernovae constraints on models of dark energy revisited,

    M. C. Bento, O. Bertolami, N. M. C. Santos, and A .A. Sen, “Supernovae constraints on models of dark energy revisited,” Phys. Rev D 71, 063501 (2005)

    2005

  58. [59]

    WMAP five-year data constraints on the unified model of dark energy and dark matter,

    T. Barreiro, O. Bertolami, and P. Torres, “WMAP five-year data constraints on the unified model of dark energy and dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 78, 043530 (2008)

    2008

  59. [60]

    Quantifying theS 8 tension with the Redshift Space Distortion data set,

    D. Benisty, “Quantifying theS 8 tension with the Redshift Space Distortion data set,” Phys. Dark Univ. 31, 100766 (2021)

    2021

  60. [61]

    The Behavior of intermediate inflationary universes,

    J. D. Barrow and P. Saich, “The Behavior of intermediate inflationary universes,” Phys. Lett. B 249, 406 (1990)

    1990

  61. [62]

    Observational Constraints on New Exact Inflationary Scalar-field Solutions,

    J. D. Barrow and A. Paliathanasis, “Observational Constraints on New Exact Inflationary Scalar-field Solutions,” Phys. Rev. D 94, 083518 (2016)

    2016

  62. [63]

    Observational constraints on new generalized Chaplygin gas model

    K. Liao, Y. Pan, and Z. H. Zhu, “Observational constraints on new generalized Chaplygin gas model” Res. Astron. Astrophys. 13, 159 (2013)

    2013

  63. [64]

    The Extended Analysis on New Generalized Chaplygin Gas,

    J. Wang, Y. B. Wu, D. Wang, and W. Q. Yang, “The Extended Analysis on New Generalized Chaplygin Gas,” Chin. Phys. Lett. 26, 089801 (2009)

    2009

  64. [65]

    Interacting New Generalized Chaplygin Gas,

    M. Jamil, “Interacting New Generalized Chaplygin Gas,” Int. J. Theor. Phys. 49, 62 (2010)

    2010

  65. [66]

    Reconstructing cosmographic parameters from different cosmological models: case study. Interacting new generalized Chaplygin gas model,

    A. Salehi, M. R. Setare, and A. Alaii, “Reconstructing cosmographic parameters from different cosmological models: case study. Interacting new generalized Chaplygin gas model,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 495 (2018)

    2018

  66. [67]

    Cosmological constraints on new generalized Chaplygin gas model,

    F. Salahedin, R. Pazhouhesh, and M. Malekjani, “Cosmological constraints on new generalized Chaplygin gas model,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus 135, 429 (2020)

    2020

  67. [68]

    Statefinder andO m Diagnostics for New Generalized Chaplygin Gas Model,

    A. Al Mamon, V. C. Dubey, and K. Bamba, “Statefinder andO m Diagnostics for New Generalized Chaplygin Gas Model,” Universe 7, 362 (2021)

    2021

  68. [69]

    An extended analysis for a generalized Chaplygin gas model,

    A. Al Mamon, A. Paliathanasis, and S. Saha, “An extended analysis for a generalized Chaplygin gas model,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 232 (2022)

    2022

  69. [70]

    Morescoet al.,”Setting the stage for cosmic chronometers

    M. Morescoet al.,”Setting the stage for cosmic chronometers. II. Impact of stellar population synthesis models systematics and full covariance matrix,” Astrophys. J. 898, 82 (2020)

    2020

  70. [71]

    Broutet al.,”The Pantheon+ analysis: cosmological constraints,” Astrophys

    D. Broutet al.,”The Pantheon+ analysis: cosmological constraints,” Astrophys. J. 938, 110 (2022)

    2022

  71. [72]

    Rubinet al.,”Union through UNITY: Cosmology with 2,000 SNe using a unified Bayesian framework,” Astrophys

    D. Rubinet al.,”Union through UNITY: Cosmology with 2,000 SNe using a unified Bayesian framework,” Astrophys. J. 986, 231 (2025)

    2025

  72. [73]

    B. Popovicet al.(DES Collaboration), ”The Dark Energy Survey Supernova Program: A Reanalysis Of Cosmology Results And Evidence For Evolving Dark Energy With An Updated Type Ia Supernova Calibration,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 548, 1-27 (2026)

    2026

  73. [74]

    Reconstruction of dark energy using DESI DR2,

    X. Zhang, Y.-H. Xu, and Y. Sang, “Reconstruction of dark energy using DESI DR2,” Commun. Theor. Phys. 78, 035404 (2026)

    2026

  74. [75]

    Late-time constraints on dynamical dark energy models using DESI DR2, Type Ia supernova, and CC measurements,

    R. Nagpal, H. Chaudhary, H. Gupta, and S. K. J. Pacif, “Late-time constraints on dynamical dark energy models using DESI DR2, Type Ia supernova, and CC measurements,” JHEAp 47, 100396 (2025)

    2025

  75. [76]

    Comparison of dynamical dark energy with ΛCDM in light of DESI DR2,

    A. N. Ormondroyd, W. J. Handley, M. P. Hobson, and A. N. Lasenby, “Comparison of dynamical dark energy with ΛCDM in light of DESI DR2,” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 547, 1-9 (2026)

    2026

  76. [77]

    Dynamical dark energy implies a coupled dark sector: Insights from DESI DR2 via a data-driven approach,

    C. You, D. Wang, and T. Yang, “Dynamical dark energy implies a coupled dark sector: Insights from DESI DR2 via a data-driven approach,” Phys. Rev. D 112, 043503 (2025)

    2025

  77. [78]

    Model-Independent Reconstruction of Quintessence Potential and Kinetic Energy from DESI DR2 and Pantheon+ Supernovae,

    S. Wang, T.-N. Li, T. Liu, and G.-H. Du, “Model-Independent Reconstruction of Quintessence Potential and Kinetic Energy from DESI DR2 and Pantheon+ Supernovae,” Eur. Phys. J. C 86, 391 (2026)

    2026

  78. [79]

    Observational constraints on dark energy models with Λ as an equilibrium point,

    A. Paliathanasis, “Observational constraints on dark energy models with Λ as an equilibrium point,” Phys. Dark Univ. 48, 101956 (2025)

    2025

  79. [80]

    Challenging the ΛCDM model: 5σevidence for a dynamical dark energy late-time transition,

    M. Scherer, M. A. Sabogal, R. C. Nunes, and A. De Felice, “Challenging the ΛCDM model: 5σevidence for a dynamical dark energy late-time transition,” Phys. Rev. D 112, 043513 (2025)

    2025

  80. [81]

    Dark Energy Is Not That Into You: Variable Couplings after DESI DR2 BAO,

    W. Yang, S. Zhang, O. Mena, S. Pan, and E. Di Valentino, “Dark Energy Is Not That Into You: Variable Couplings after DESI DR2 BAO,” arXiv:2508.19109 [astro-ph.CO] (2025)

    arXiv 2025

Showing first 80 references.