Paper detail

A general reconstruction of the recent expansion history of the universe

Distance measurements are currently the most powerful tool to study the expansion history of the universe without specifying its matter content nor any theory of gravitation. Assuming only an isotropic, homogeneous and flat universe, in this work we introduce a model-independent method to reconstruct directly the deceleration function via a piecewise function. Including a penalty factor, we are able to vary continuously the complexity of the deceleration function from a linear case to an arbitrary $(n+1)$-knots spline interpolation. We carry out a Monte Carlo (MC) analysis to determine the best penalty factor, evaluating the bias-variance trade-off, given the uncertainties of the SDSS-II and SNLS supernova combined sample (JLA), compilations of baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) and $H(z)$ data. The bias-variance analysis is done for three fiducial models with different features in the deceleration curve. For each fiducial model, we test different reconstructions using, in each case, more than $10^4$ catalogs in a total of about $5\times 10^5$. This investigation proved to be essential in determining the best reconstruction to study these data. We show that, evaluating a single fiducial model, the conclusions about the bias-variance ratio are misleading. We determine the reconstruction method in which the bias represents at most $10\%$ of the total uncertainty. Finally, we apply the Ensemble Sampler Markov Chain Monte Carlo (ESMCMC) method to explore the posterior of the deceleration function up to redshift $1.3$ (using only JLA) and $2.3$ (JLA+BAO+$H(z)$). We obtain that the standard cosmological model agrees within $3σ$ level with the reconstructed results in the whole studied redshift intervals. Since our method is calibrated to minimize the bias, the error bars of the reconstructed functions are a good approximation for the total uncertainty.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.