Paper detail

A GREAT model comparison against the cosmological constant

Recently, a covariant formulation of non-equilibrium phenomena in the context of General Relativity was proposed in order to explain from first principles the observed accelerated expansion of the Universe, without the need for a cosmological constant, leading to the GREA theory. Here, we confront the GREA theory against the latest cosmological data, including type Ia supernovae, baryon acoustic oscillations, the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation, Hubble rate data from the cosmic chronometers and the recent $H_0$ measurements. We perform Markov Chain Monte Carlo analyses and a Bayesian model comparison, by estimating the evidence via thermodynamic integration, and find that when all the aforementioned data are included, but no prior on $H_0$, the difference in the log-evidence is $\sim -9$ in favor of GREA, thus resulting in overwhelming support for the latter over the cosmological constant and cold dark matter model ($Λ$CDM). When we also include priors on $H_0$, either from Cepheids or the Tip of the Red Giant Branch measurements, then due to the tensions with CMB data the GREA theory is found to be statistically equivalent with $Λ$CDM.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.