Paper detail

A parametrization of the growth index of matter perturbations in various Dark Energy models and observational prospects using a Euclid-like survey

We provide exact solutions to the cosmological matter perturbation equation in a homogeneous FLRW universe with a vacuum energy that can be parametrized by a constant equation of state parameter $w$ and a very accurate approximation for the Ansatz $w(a)=w_0+w_a(1-a)$. We compute the growth index $γ=\log f(a)/\log\Om_m(a)$, and its redshift dependence, using the exact and approximate solutions in terms of Legendre polynomials and show that it can be parametrized as $γ(a)=γ_0+γ_a(1-a)$ in most cases. We then compare four different types of dark energy (DE) models: $wΛ$CDM, DGP, $f(R)$ and a LTB-large-void model, which have very different behaviors at $z\gsim1$. This allows us to study the possibility to differentiate between different DE alternatives using wide and deep surveys like Euclid, which will measure both photometric and spectroscopic redshifts for several hundreds of millions of galaxies up to redshift $z\simeq 2$. We do a Fisher matrix analysis for the prospects of differentiating among the different DE models in terms of the growth index, taken as a given function of redshift or with a principal component analysis, with a value for each redshift bin for a Euclid-like survey. We use as observables the complete and marginalized power spectrum of galaxies $P(k)$ and the Weak Lensing (WL) power spectrum. We find that, using $P(k)$, one can reach (2%, 5%) errors in $(w_0, w_a)$, and (4%, 12%) errors in $(γ_0, γ_a)$, while using WL we get errors at least twice as large. These estimates allow us to differentiate easily between DGP, $f(R)$ models and $Λ$CDM, while it would be more difficult to distinguish the latter from a variable equation of state parameter or LTB models using only the growth index.}

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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.