BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Mehdi Rezaei

Mehdi Rezaei contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
astro-ph.COgr-qchep-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Running vacuum versus Holographic dark energy: a cosmographic comparison

We perform a comparative study of different types of dynamical dark energy models (DDES) using the cosmographic method. Among the models being examined herein we have the Running Vacuum models (RVMs), which have demonstrated considerable ability to fit the overall cosmological data at a level comparable to the standard cosmological model, $Λ$CDM, and capable of alleviating the $σ_8$ and $H_0$ tensions. At the same time we address a variety of Holographic dark energy models (HDEs) with different options for the time (redshift)-varying model parameter $c=c(z)$. We deal with the HDEs under the double assumption of fixed and evolving holographic length scale and assess which one is better. Both types of DDEs (RVMs and HDEs) are confronted with the most robust cosmographic data available, namely the Pantheon sample of supernovae (SnIa), the baryonic acoustic oscillation data (BAOs) extracted from measurement of the power spectrum and bispectrum of the BOSS data release, and the cosmic chronometer measurements of the Hubble rate (CCHs) at different redshifts obtained from spectroscopic observations of passively evolving galaxies. Using these data samples we assess the viability of the mentioned DDEs and compare them with the concordance $Λ$CDM model. From cosmographic analysis we conclude that the RVMs fare comparably well to the $Λ$CDM, a fact which adds up more credit to their sound phenomenological status. In contrast, while some of the HDEs are favored using the current Hubble horizon as fixed holographic length, they become highly unfavoured in the more realistic case when the holographic length is dynamical and evolves as the Hubble horizon.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Comparison between different methods of model selection in cosmology

There are several methods for model selection in cosmology which have at least two major goals, that of finding the correct model or predicting well. In this work we discuss through a study of well-known model selection methods like Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion (BIC), deviance information criterion (DIC) and Bayesian evidence, how these different goals are pursued in each paradigm. We also apply another method for model selection which less seen in cosmological literature, the Cross-validation method. Using these methods we will compare two different scenarios in cosmology, $Λ$CDM model and dynamical dark energy. We show that each of the methods tends to different results in model selection. While BIC and Bayesian evidence overrule the dynamical dark energy scenarios with 2 or 3 extra degree of freedom, the DIC and cross-validation method prefer these dynamical models to $Λ$CDM model. Assuming the numerical results of different analysis and combining cosmological and statistical aspects of the subject, we propose cross-validation as an interesting method for model selection in cosmology that can lead to different results in comparison with usual methods of model selection.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Cosmographic parameters in model-independent approaches

Cosmographic approach, a Taylor expansion of the Hubble function, has been used as a model-independent method to investigate the evolution of the universe in the presence of cosmological data. Apart from possible technical problems like the radius of convergence, there is an ongoing debates about the tensions appear when one investigates some high redshift cosmological data. In this work, we consider two common data sets namely SNIa (Pantheon sample) and the Hubble data to investigate advantages and disadvantages of the cosmographic approach. To do this, we obtain the evolution of cosmographic functions using cosmographic method as well as two other well known model-independent approaches namely, the Gaussian process and the Genetic algorithm. We also assume $Λ$CDM model as concordance model to compare the results of mentioned approaches. Our results indicate that the results of cosmography comparing with the other approaches, are not exact enough. Considering the Hubble data which is less certain, the results of $q_0$ and $j_0$ obtained in cosmography, provides a tension at more than $3σ$ away from the best result of $Λ$CDM. Assuming both of data samples in different approaches we show that the cosmographic approach, because of providing some biased results, is not the best approach for reconstruction of cosmographic functions, especially at higher redshifts.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Cosmography approach to dark energy cosmologies: new constrains using the Hubble diagrams of supernovae, quasars and gamma-ray bursts

In the context of cosmography approach and using the data of Hubble diagram for supernovae, quasars and gamma-ray bursts, we study some DE parametrizations and also the concordance $Λ$CDM universe. Using the different combinations of data sample including ({\it i}) supernovae (Pantheon), ({\it ii}) Pantheon + quasars and ({\it iii}) Pantheon + quasars + gamma-ray bursts and applying the minimization of $χ^2$ function of distance modulus of data samples in the context of Markov Chain Monte Carlo method, we first obtain the constrained values of the cosmographic parameters in model independent cosmography scenario. We then investigate our analysis, for different concordance $Λ$CDM cosmology, $w$CDM, CPL and Pade parametrizations. Comparing the numerical values of the cosmographic parameters obtained for DE scenarios with those of the model independent method, we show that the concordance $Λ$CDM model has a serious tension when we involve the quasars and gamma-ray bursts data in our analysis. While the high redshift quasars and gamma-ray bursts can falsify the concordance model, our results of cosmography approach indicate that the other DE parametrizations are still consistent with these observations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access