Dark energy reconstruction based on the Padé approximation; an expansion around the $$\varLambda $$ Λ CDM

Mehrabi, Ahmad; Basilakos, Spyros

doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6368-x

Cited by 27 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 84 publications

(95 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The model with higher evidence is favored over another one. Moreover, the Bayesian evidence for model selection has been widely used in cosmology [41][42][43][44][45][46]. In this paper, we use the Jeffreys' scale [47] to measure the significant difference between two models.…”

Section: Observational Data and Bayesian Inferencementioning

confidence: 99%

A Bayesian comparison between $$\Lambda $$CDM and phenomenologically emergent dark energy models

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this work we examine the recently proposed phenomenological emergent dark energy (PEDE) model by [1], using the latest observational data in both expansion and perturbation levels. Applying the statistical Bayesian evidence as well as the AIC and BIC information criteria, we compare the PEDE model with the concordance CDM model in both flat and non-flat universes. We combine the observational datasets as (i) expansion data (except CMB), (ii) expansion data (including CMB) and (iii) expansion data jointed to the growth rate dataset. Our statistical results show that the flat-CDM model is still the best model. In the case of expansion data (including CMB), we observe that the flat-PEDE model is well consistent with observations as well as the concordance CDM universe. While in the cases of (i) and (iii), the PEDE models in both of the flat and non-flat geometries are not favored. In particular, we see that in the perturbation level the PEDE model can not fit the observations as equally as standard CDM cosmology. As the ability of the model, we show that the PEDE models can alleviate the tension of Hubble constant value appearing between the local observations and Planck inferred estimation in standard cosmology.

show abstract

Section: Observational Data and Bayesian Inferencementioning

confidence: 99%

A Bayesian comparison between $$\Lambda $$CDM and phenomenologically emergent dark energy models

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the framework of homogeneous and isotropic Universe, the accelerated expansion can be described by considering either an exotic matter with negative pressure [16][17][18][19][20][21][22] or a modification of gravity [ f (R) theories and the like, 23a e-mail: Mehrabi@basu.ac.ir (corresponding author) b e-mail: svasil@academyofathens.gr 27]. Among the large family of dark energy and modified gravity models, the simplest case is the spatially flat ΛCDM model for which cold dark matter (CDM) and baryonic matter coexist with the cosmological constant.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does $$\varLambda $$CDM really be in tension with the Hubble diagram data?

Mehrabi

Basilakos

2020

Eur. Phys. J. C

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we elaborate further on the $$\varLambda $$ Λ CDM “tension”, suggested recently by the authors Lusso et al. (Astron Astrophys 628:L4, 2019) and Risaliti and Lusso (Nat Astron 3(3):272, 2019). We combine Supernovae type Ia (SNIa) with quasars (QSO) and Gamma Ray Bursts (GRB) data in order to reconstruct in a model independent way the Hubble relation to as high redshifts as possible. Specifically, in the case of either SNIa or SNIa/QSO data we find that the current values of the cosmokinetic parameters extracted from the Gaussian process are consistent with those of $$\varLambda $$ Λ CDM. Including GRBs in the analysis we find a tension, which lies between $$2\sigma $$ 2 σ and $$3\sigma $$ 3 σ levels respectively. Finally, we find that at high redshifts ($$z>1$$ z > 1 ) the corresponding cosmokinetic parameters significantly deviate from those of $$\varLambda $$ Λ CDM, hence the possibility of new Physics is not precluded by the present analysis.

show abstract

“…Generally speaking, all theoretical models have some free parameters which should be constrained by an observational data. So having a model and some observational data, it is an easy task to perform a statistical parameter inference to obtain the free parameters as well as their uncertainties [27][28][29][30][31][32].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconstruction of dark energy density by non-parametric approaches

Mehrabi¹,

Vazirnia²

2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evolution of dark energy density is a crucial quantity in understanding the nature of dark energy. Often, the quantity is described by the so called equation of state, that is the ratio of dark energy pressure to its density. In this scenario, the dark energy density is always positive throughout the cosmic history and a negative value is not allowed. Assuming a homogeneous and isotropic universe, we reconstruct the dark energy density directly from observational data and investigate its evolution through cosmic history. We consider the latest SNIa, BAO and cosmic chronometer data and reconstruct the dark energy density in both flat and non-flat universes up to redshift z ∼ 3. The results are well in agreement with the ΛCDM up to redshift z ∼ 1.5, whereas all data and methods, in our analysis, provide a negative dark energy density at high redshifts.

show abstract

Dark energy reconstruction based on the Padé approximation; an expansion around the $$\varLambda $$ Λ CDM

Cited by 27 publications

References 84 publications

A Bayesian comparison between $$\Lambda $$CDM and phenomenologically emergent dark energy models

A Bayesian comparison between $$\Lambda $$CDM and phenomenologically emergent dark energy models

Does $$\varLambda $$CDM really be in tension with the Hubble diagram data?

Reconstruction of dark energy density by non-parametric approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About