Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

A new view of k-essence

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv astro-ph/0302279 v1 pith:OQ326Z2M submitted 2003-02-14 astro-ph gr-qchep-ph

A new view of k-essence

classification astro-ph gr-qchep-ph
keywords k-essencemodelsquintessencecannotformaccelerationalternativeanalysis
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

K-essence models, relying on scalar fields with non-canonical kinetic terms, have been proposed as an alternative to quintessence in explaining the observed acceleration of the Universe. We consider the use of field redefinitions to cast k-essence in a more familiar form. While k-essence models cannot in general be rewritten in the form of quintessence models, we show that in certain dynamical regimes an equivalence can be made, which in particular can shed light on the tracking behaviour of k-essence. In several cases, k-essence cannot be observationally distinguished from quintessence using the homogeneous evolution, though there may be small effects on the perturbation spectrum. We make a detailed analysis of two k-essence models from the literature and comment on the nature of the fine tuning arising in the models.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Constant-roll $\beta$-exponential inflation: Palatini formalism

    gr-qc 2026-01 reject novelty 4.0

    A parameter scan of constant-roll β-exponential inflation in Palatini R² gravity claims agreement with ACT/Planck contours, but the derivation is undermined by algebraic sign errors and an absent non-Gaussianity calculation.